Structural Survey

Factors influencing flexibility in buildings

Niklas Israelsson, Bengt Hansson,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Niklas Israelsson, Bengt Hansson, (2009) "Factors influencing flexibility in buildings", Structural Survey, Vol.
27 Issue: 2, pp.138-147, https://doi.org/10.1108/02630800910956461
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/02630800910956461
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

Downloaded on: 29 October 2017, At: 00:02 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 18 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1154 times since 2009*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2009),"Sustainable refurbishment: policy direction and support in the UK", Structural Survey,
Vol. 27 Iss 2 pp. 148-161 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/02630800910956470">https://
doi.org/10.1108/02630800910956470</a>
(2005),"Adaptable office buildings: theory and practice", Facilities, Vol. 23 Iss 3/4 pp. 119-127 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/02632770510578494">https://doi.org/10.1108/02632770510578494</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:434496 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-080X.htm

SS
27,2 Factors influencing flexibility in
buildings
Niklas Israelsson and Bengt Hansson
138 Lund University, Malmo, Sweden

Abstract
Purpose Activity-suited buildings create effective processes in a business. Building adaptation has
a limited time perspective; suited premises need to change over time, in order to keep up with the
processes in using a building. In an ideal situation, owners, clients and users, based on a demand for
effortless adaptability, would be able to transform the building when it is needed. This puts high
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

demand on the adaptability in a building, i.e. flexibility. The purpose of this paper is to provide other
decision-makers with a tool to validate information regarding flexibility.
Design/methodology/approach The paper identifies flexibility factors and investigages how
the factors are influencing the adaptability. In order to validate the importance of the factors, they are
placed in order of precedence and processed using factor analysis.
Findings From a municipal and socio-economic viewpoint, there are advantages in more flexible
buildings. To build and administer sites over the total building life can increase the flexibility of
buildings and, used widely, should increase the opportunity to use the nations property more
effectively than from an ordinary viewpoint.
Originality/value The results will be relevant for the whole construction sector.
Keywords Buildings, Property, Decision making, Sweden
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Flexibility is defined as the ability to change and adapt a building to altered activities
through its physical and administrative environment (Greden et al., 2005). Each year, a
small part of the total building stock is complemented through new construction
(Statistics Sweden, 2005). A similar number of buildings are thought to be renewed,
and adapted, to new activities. In the latter connection, it is of financial consequence
that buildings can be adapted to new requirements without extensive, technically
complex and expensive measures (Gann and Barlow, 1996). The question of flexibility
has been highlighted because, for example, an increasing number of schools are rebuilt
to meet changing needs. Another example is the shift from pre-school to group
accommodation for geriatrics. Costs can be reduced if buildings are amenable to
adaptation without recourse to extensive works. From a socio-economic perspective,
there are advantages in more flexible buildings, where building life span can be
extended significantly. Adoption of attitudes that see flexibility as not only desirable,
but socially and economically advantageous would help ensure that the nations
building stock was utilised more effectively (Sumer, 1997). For the purpose of this
Structural Survey paper and the study, the term flexibility is used in the context of the operational
Vol. 27 No. 2, 2009
pp. 138-147 adaptability of a building.
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0263-080X
Flexibility in buildings is controlled by various decisions. In every investment, an
DOI 10.1108/02630800910956461 active or passive decision is made to control flexibility. The conditions that enable
 decision-support and the individuals responsible for those decisions are critical Flexibility in
aspects. Decision-makers affect decisions in various ways depending on personality, buildings
participation in the process, and relationships with other interested parties, previous
experience, knowledge level and individual interests. Decisions are thus affected by
factors outside the direct subject area and are seldom made by the same
decision-maker throughout the life of the building.
The paper proposes conceptual aspects to help build greater understanding of the 139
processes that control changes in buildings towards future flexible buildings. The topic
addresses a new aspect on how factors influence flexibility in buildings. It also
addresses the role of the decision makers and their part in making buildings more
flexible. The objective of the paper is to provide decision-makers with knowledge of
how to create flexibility in buildings
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

The nature of decisions for future flexibility in buildings

Buildings are produced chiefly to fulfil a requirement for local activities and it is usual
for these requirements to change over time (Fernandez, 2003). However, it is unusual
for planned changes to be incorporated at the outset and so the need for overall
strategies for simplifying changes arising over the life of a building are necessary
(Slaughter, 2001). The market for flexible buildings is relatively undeveloped and it is
uncommon for buildings to be designed with future change of use in mind (Greden,
2005; CMHC Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2004). Increased flexibility
offers the prospect of higher economic value through less costly reconstruction, but it
also increases initial cost. Nonetheless, flexible solutions may increase the initial
production cost by less than 2 per cent, a sum that could be recovered at the first
renovation (Greden, 2005). Clearly, the type and extent of flexibility that is being
built-in is a material consideration in making such claims.
Decisions concerning flexibility can involve lengthy procedures and balancing the
options covering possible future changes; however, by facing these decisions at a point
when they can be readily incorporated in the design, later decisions may be simplified
(Greden, 2005). By unravelling the decision-making process and understanding its
context better, it may be possible to improve the quality of decision-making and the
ability to determine the most appropriate level of flexibility to be provided.
An assessment has to be done for buildings against the background of what
customers want and how much the owner of the property can accommodate changes of
the building into another, more efficient machine. This assessment is of course also
linked to supply and demand. In the case when building company managers regard
planning for the future as uncertain it would be good to foresee patterns and
upgrading opportunities at the time of initial production. This devolves to the overall
organisational decision processes. A greater understanding of the processes that
control changes in buildings and planning for the future should surely simplify the
assessment of potential for buildings and thus give decision-makers an increased
facility to upgrade the degree of usefulness of the machine (Sandgren and
Lundstrom, 1995). Like machines in a factory, most buildings are upgraded, but there
is little planning by building companies in comparison with factories where upgrading
may be planned many times. It is sometimes enough to indicate the risk that the
machine will become deficient at some time in the future in order for forward
planning to be taken into account.
 SS Taking into account the factors that affect a building in the future involves a
27,2 strategic risk assessment of the buildings ability to be changed. The factors that affect
a buildings propensity for change are regarded as risk factors that can be structured
and assessed on the basis of their probable future occurrence. If some factor is thought
to be especially probable, forward planning can minimise damage at the time of
change. Increased risk awareness in matters concerning flexibility reduces the
140 likelihood of unplanned and expensive changes in future. There are, of course,
problems in taking a decision on something that will not happen in the foreseeable
future. Increased risk awareness involves long-term strategic decisions (Gibson and
Louargand, 2002). Insecurity about future changes can be reduced by planning and
assessing the risk of various future outcomes and categorising the factors that affect
the future.
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

Identifying flexibility factors

Through a questionnaire-based survey undertaken in late 2006, the following factors
have been identified to affect flexibility in buildings. Questionnaires were sent to
decision-makers within 52 Swedish real estate and construction companies and an
analysis of their responses is presented in this study. From the survey the following
flexibility factors are identified. (Israelsson and Hansson, 2006).

Material standards
Materials with a life suitable for both existing and future activities create flexibility in
buildings. Choice of material affects the life of the whole building and adapting the
material to suit both current and future activities gives added value (The Swedish
National Board of Housing, Building and Planning, 2005). This factor was rated, using
factor analysis, as having the least influence in affecting flexibility in comparison with
the other presented factors.

Production
Today prefabrication plays an important role in construction industry. Prefabrication
means that all or parts of a building are made in factories and brought to the building
site ready to be assembled (Ballard and Arbulu, 2004). Compared with the earlier
construction methods, these modern building techniques have become more flexible
regarding the techniques of manufacturing. Manufacturing is the first stage in the
buildings physical life cycle and it is therefore important to get it right from the outset.
One small error in manufacturing can result in consequences for future rebuilding and
therefore affect flexibility.

Planning for future changes and service life

The literature clarifies that a plan for the lifetime of the building drawn up during
initial design should provide increased flexibility (Moravek, 1996). Future planning
determines the possible future functions to which a building can be adapted. Current
buildings are regulated by a number of laws and guidelines, but over the course of time
these will change or be amended. A building often has a long service life. Over time the
laws that applied when it was built may have changed. It may then be that future
rebuilding will experience problems with new laws and guidelines.
 Installations Flexibility in
A very high degree of planning is required to create installations that meet all buildings
requirements on current buildings (Hamrebjork, 1994). Modern installations generally
take up more space than was required a few decades ago. With regard to flexibility and
installations the problem arises because of difficulty in changing installations
(Apleberger et al., 2005).
141
Financial aspects
Increased flexibility creates increased value during rebuilding, but also increased
initial cost (Greden, 2005). However, a study shows that flexible solutions increase the
initial production cost by an average of less than 2 per cent, which can be saved
directly during the first renovation. Figure 1 shows that the financial factor has the
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

second strongest affect on flexibility.

Awareness aspects
The term awareness is taken to mean that users, property-owners and builders are
aware that the building is subject to change. In the event that any one of them is
unaware of the opportunity of adapting and changing the building is static. The aim of
flexible thinking assumes that the interested parties take account of the planned or
implemented adaptation potential of the building. This factor is rated as having the
strongest affect on flexibility.

Summary
The aspects of awareness, finance, and installations affect flexibility the most, while
future planning, production and material standards have lesser affect on the flexibility.
But the fact is that all aspects are significantly affecting flexibility. Figure 1 shows a
separation between the six factors, three soft ones (awareness aspects, finance and
future planning) and three hard ones (material standards, production and
installations). The hard aspects are named hard because they are all directly

Figure 1.
Factors affecting
flexibility
 SS connected to the building. The soft aspects are called soft because they are not
27,2 directly connected to the building.

Identifying decision-makers
From the same questionnaire-based survey undertaken in late 2006, the following
decision-makers have been identified as having a strong role in affecting flexibility in a
142 building. Questionnaires were sent to decision-makers within 52 Swedish real estate
and construction companies and an analysis of their responses is presented in this
study. From the survey the following parties are identified (Israelsson and Hansson,
2006).

Property owners
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

Property owners are the ones who have the most to gain from a flexible building, but
only where they do not intend to dispose of the property before a change takes place. In
that case, they have a marketing advantage over those with inflexible buildings. The
behaviour of property owners affects decisions regarding the degree of flexibility. In
most cases, property owners make the assessment as to whether or not the building
will be changed. Assessment of building changes is done on the basis of conditions
such as supply, demand, and opportunities for change, financial attitude and
opportunity for increased efficiency. Property owners play a dominant role in
influencing the flexibility of a building.

Architects
Architects have a great opportunity to affect flexibility in a building. An architect is to
perform the design of buildings, and will then visually illustrate how a building will be
used. This means that in cases where the architect feels that the building will probably
change use in the future to something other than that initially envisaged, he or she are
to ensure that the function of a building is also suitable for future activities through
their designs. Architects can therefore act as decision-makers to affect flexibility in
buildings.

Contractors
There may be decision-makers by the contractors whom via various decisions can
affect the level of flexibility in the buildings they produce. These parties could for
example be the CEO who has the roles of a company-wide strategic decision maker.
The overhead decisions can affect further decisions on the adaptability of the
buildings. It is not unusual that decision-makers in the contractor companies
participate in the development of industry wide standards that affect the production of
buildings. The result shows that building company has little influence over flexibility
in a building in comparisons with the other factors.

Authorities
Authorities also affect flexibility in Swedens property stock (Greden, 2005). National
and municipal decision-makers affect flexibility through overall legal and strategic
decisions. Swedens property stock is also affected by political decisions that act in
unison. In new production and major rebuilding, the design of the building is always
examined in various ways to ensure safety and accessibility, and the public has the
 opportunity to affect the decision. In these decisions, flexibility in buildings is affected. Flexibility in
As an example, it is a legal duty to provide handicapped access in all newly buildings
constructed and renovated buildings, this rather new aspect was hard to foresee only
15 years ago. This means that in major reconstruction there is a requirement for
increased accessibility. This decision can make a building that previously was capable
of being changed no longer flexible but static. Rebuilding becomes more expensive
than previously because of a legal impact or regulations enforced by authorities. 143
Project manager
The decisions of individual project managers can also affect flexibility in buildings, in
that their choices and attitudes produce different outcomes in terms of the opportunity
for change in the building. The individual project managers make decisions, or affect
them, and in this way they also affect flexibility.
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

Users
Users can affect flexibility in buildings when their activities change and develop,
which means that buildings also have to develop and change accordingly. Users
affecting property owners via decisions on individual activities can thus cause
property owners to make decisions concerning flexibility.

Clients
Clients can be property owners, building companies, or other organisations that have a
financial or other involvement in producing a building. Through their financial
involvement with a building, their ability to affect the decisions to ensure future
efficiency of the buildings is increased. Clients are often the ones who initiate the
production of buildings and thus have the opportunity to affect flexibility in the
buildings they produce (see Figure 2).

Summary
Some decision-makers have a greater opportunity to affect decisions concerning
flexibility; these are property owners, architects, clients and users. Individual project

Figure 2.
Decision makers affecting
the flexibility
 SS managers, authorities and contractors have comparatively less ability to affect
27,2 decisions. In Figure 2 the significance of these issues have been presented.

Developing a rational decision-making approach

A building planned for future reconstruction should be sufficiently flexible to assure
conditions for simpler rebuilding. The required degree of flexibility depends on what
144 sort of activities will take place in the building over its service life. The decision
approach is thus based on an understanding of the factors that affect flexibility, i.e.
who makes the decisions on degree of flexibility, the nature of the decisions, and
flexibility factors. The level of flexibility that the building will require at a certain point
need not be high if the building is not to be changed during its lifetime. Where a
building is reconstructed in the future, a higher flexibility level will be required,
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

paralleling the magnitude of the changes, to produce potential for reconstruction (see
Figure 3).
For example, if the flexibility factor, material standards, alone is used the level of
flexibility will be only 11 per cent. If another flexibility factor is added, say production,
then the flexibility level will be increased from 11 to 26 per cent. Together with
flexibility factor installations the level of flexibility will increase to 44 per cent. These
three are together called the hard aspects because they are all directly connected to
the building. The soft aspects are those that are not directly connected to the building
and are not as easy to foresee having a part in the total flexibility of a building. When
comparing the soft aspects with the hard ones the statistics show that the soft aspects
are more important than the hard (see Figure 4).
Finally, if both hard and soft aspects are used then a maximum level of flexibility is
achieved. Therefore it is clear that as more flexibility factors are adapted the higher the
flexibility level will be. This means high flexibility factors will definitely enhance the
possibilities of rebuilding.
After identifying the decision-makers and the decisions to be made regarding
flexibility, parallels can be drawn with how close actual flexibility will be to ideal

Figure 3.
Overview perspective on
the subject
 Flexibility in
buildings

145
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

Figure 4.
Flexibility level in
buildings in relation to
choice of input factor

flexibility. Overall, it is the total sum of decisions that affect the flexibility of a
building. It is both the flexibility factors and the decision-makers that have the most
influence.
A flexible building would be simpler for the purchaser to sell on than a building
adapted for a single activity. Also, any future rebuilding should be simple for the
purchaser through awareness planning. Relations between customer and purchaser are
different, based on short or long-term relations, where all involved have various roles.
Relations and roles mean that the opportunities for the customer or purchaser to affect
the decision regarding flexibility vary from one project to another (Yasamis et al.,
2002). Flexible buildings are created through awareness on the part of everyone
involved. A problem from an awareness angle is therefore the customers short-term
understanding of the positive aspects of a flexible building. Long-term relations more
readily reflect the awareness aspects where the relations between purchaser and
executor are based on understanding and more well defined roles. Awareness aspects
have different effects depending on the design of the project and who is involved, but
overall it is flexibility in buildings that seems to have the most influence, which shows
in the statistics.

Conclusions
There is a great demand for increased adaptability in buildings (Lansley et al., 2004),
which can be shown in the results of the survey made in late 2006. A greater
understanding of the processes that control changes in buildings and planning for the
future would simplify the assessment of potential for the building stock. By taking into
 SS account that decision-makers need to be aware of flexibility factors and the nature of
27,2 the decisions concerning flexibility, it is possible to present balanced results regarding
adaptability. The factors are presented in the paper along with the concerned
decision-makers. The study shows that all the decision-makers and all the factors
affecting the flexibility.
The hard aspects are all directly connected to the building and therefore easy to see
146 as a part of the flexibility but the soft aspects are often disregarded in the context of
flexibility. The soft aspects are aspects that are not directly connected to the building
and if not included the maximum flexibility can only reach 44 per cent. The statistics
show that the soft aspects are more important at 56 per cent, but you can of course not
disregard the need for a building to make it a flexible one.
There is a lack of knowledge and a lack of awareness in the area of flexibility. To be
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

able to increase the decision-makers knowledge an overview of the aspects has been
presented. The paper gives decision-makers a way of presenting balanced and
deliberate result regarding adaptability in buildings. They need to be aware of, who the
decision-makers are, what the nature of the decisions are, and which governing factors
that affect the flexibility are.
Flexible buildings are created through awareness on the part of everyone involved
and it is therefore important to involve all actors to achieve a good result regarding the
level of flexibility. It is important not to disregard the soft aspects with, awareness,
financial aspects and future planning as parts. By improving the quality of the
decision-making process the most appropriate level of adaptability will be provided
but an assessment has to be against what customers want and how much the owner of
the property can accommodate changes of the building, into another more efficient one.

References
Apleberger, L., Dahlof, P. and Edholm, G. (2005), Effektivare projektrelationer byggherre
entreprenor installator, Forstudie (More Efficient Project Relations, Building Proprietor
Contractors Installations Consultant, a Pre-study), Lulea University, Lulea, pp. 1-2, 6,
15.
Ballard, G. and Arbulu, R. (2004), Making Prefabrication Lean, IGLC, Copenhagen, p. 2f.
CMHC Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2004), Assessing Building for Adaptability
Energy-Related Environmental Impact of Buildings, Annex 31 Project, pp. 2-4, 5, 7.
Fernandez, J. (2003), Design for change: part 1: diversified lifetimes, Arq. Architectural
Research Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 169-82.
Gann, D. and Barlow, J. (1996), Flexibility in building use: the technical feasibility of converting
redundant offices into flats, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 55-67.
Gibson, V. and Louargand, M. (2002), Risk management and the corporate real estate portfolio,
American Real Estate Society Annual Meeting, University of Reading, Reading, p. 5.
Greden, L. (2005), Flexibility in Building Design: A Real Options Approach and Valuation
Methodology to Address Risk, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA,
pp. 5-16, 20, 28, 30, 49, 62, 89, 215, 216.
Greden, L., De Neufville, R. and Glicksman, L. (2005), Management of Technology Investment
Risk with Real Options-Based Design: A Case Study of an Innovative Building Technology,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, p. 8.
 Hamrebjork, L. (1994), Samordning stomme och installationer nu och i framtiden (Coordination Flexibility in
of Building Structure and Installations Now and in the Future), Project 2088, The Swedish
Construction Industrys Organisation for Research and Development, SBUF, Stockholm. buildings
Israelsson, N. and Hansson, B. (2006), Activity suited buildings: decision making-model for
flexibility, Construction in the XXI Century: Local and Global Challenges, Joint 2006CIB
W065/W055/W086 International Symposium Proceedings, Rome, October 18-20,
pp. s164-5.
147
Lansley, P., McCreadie, C., Tinker, A., Flanagan, S., Goodacre, K. and Turner-Smith, A. (2004),
Adapting the homes of older people: a case study of costs and savings, Building Research
and Information, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 468-83.
Moravek, J. (1996), Preventing future shock in todays buildings, Consulting-Specifying
Engineer, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 28-32.
Sandgren, U. and Lundstrom, S. (1995), Fullt Hus Styrverktyg for effektivt lokal-utnyttjande (Full
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

House Monitoring Effective Localisation Usage), Swedish County Association of Local

Authorities, Stockholm, p. 5.
Slaughter, S. (2001), Design strategies to increase building flexibility, Building Research and
Information, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 208-17.
Statistics Sweden (2005), SCB, Statistics Sweden, Stockholm, available at: www.scb.se/
templates/tableOrChart_29305.asp (accessed 24 February 2005).
Sumer, A. (1997), Flexibility management: the ultimate strategy, Industrial Management,
Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 26-31.
(The) Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning (2005), Flytta fram
positionerna! Bygga-bo-dialogen 6 seminarier (Move the Positions Forward! The Build
and Live Dialog 6 Seminars), The Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and
Planning, Stockholm, p. 66, 71.
Yasamis, F., Arditi, D. and Mohammadi, J. (2002), Assessing contractor quality performance,
Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 211-22.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Ulisses Munarim, Enedir Ghisi. 2016. Environmental feasibility of heritage buildings rehabilitation.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58, 235-249. [CrossRef]
2. Dulani Halvitigala Faculty of Business and Law, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia Richard G.
Reed Faculty of Business and Law, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia . 2015. Identifying adaptive
strategies employed by office building investors. Property Management 33:5, 478-493. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
3. Nicholas ChilesheSchool of Natural and Built Environments, Barbara Hardy Institute (BHI), University
of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia Jamal M. KhatibFaculty of Science and Engineering, University
of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK Mohamed FarahOmniserv Ltd, London, UK. 2013. The
perceptions of contractor's and landlord's representatives in the refurbishment of tower blocks. Facilities
31:11/12, 521-541. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 00:02 29 October 2017 (PT)

4. Will SwanRetrofit innovation in the UK social housing sector 36-52. [CrossRef]

5. Nicholas ChilesheSchool of Natural and Built Environments, Barbara Hardy Institute (BHI), University
of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia Jamal M. KhatibSchool of Technology, University of
Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK Mohamed FarahLondon, UK. 2013. The perceptions of tenants
in the refurbishment of tower blocks. Facilities 31:3/4, 119-137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. Philip Davies, Mohamed Osmani. 2011. Low carbon housing refurbishment challenges and incentives:
Architects perspectives. Building and Environment 46:8, 1691-1698. [CrossRef]