Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Sustainability in Energy and Buildings

KES-SEB 2018: Sustainability in Energy and Buildings 2018 pp 228–237Cite as

Evaluating Sustainability of Prefabrication Methods in Comparison with Traditional Methods

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ((SIST,volume 131))

Abstract

The construction industry is an important economic sector when it comes to using fossil fuels and consequent CO2 emissions and environmental pollution. It also involves considerable investment in resources as buildings and infrastructure last a long time. Considering the importance and influence of the construction industry on any moves toward sustainable development choosing a sustainable method of construction is of prime importance. This paper compares prefabrication methods with traditional construction based on factors affecting the overall sustainability of the construction phase. To do this, after a brief review of energy and the environmental status of the world, sustainable development, sustainable construction and prefabrication methods are defined. Then, by understanding the important role of the construction industry in sustainable development, the literature will be investigated to identify the most important factors affecting the sustainability of a construction project. At the end, prefabricated construction and traditional methods will be compared based on these factors in order to evaluate their potential for contributing to sustainability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Global Footprint Network: National Footprint Accounts, 2016 Edition 2016. www.footprintnework.org. Accessed June 2016

  2. OECD: World Energy Balances 2017 (2017). OECD Publishing, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  3. Observatory: Hong Kong in a warming world. Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Observatory (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Whitehouse, D.: The Global Warming Standstill. GWPF Report 10. The Global Warming Policy Foundation, Londen (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Mobil, E.: The Outlook for Energy: A View to 2040. SP-142, The Global Warming Policy Foundation. Texas Exxon Mobil (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Conti, J.J.: Annual Energy Outlook with projections to 2040, U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Administration, U. S. E. I.: International Energy Outlook 2017. DOE/EIA-0484, U.S. Energy Information Administration U.S. Energy Information Adm, Washington (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Randers, J.: 2052: a global forecast for the next forty years. White River Junction (VT), Chelsea Green (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gea: Global Energy Assessment - Toward a Sustainable Future. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Herbers, J.: Prefab modern, foreward by Michael Graves. Harper Design International, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vale, B.: Prefabs: a history of the UK temporary housing programme. London [u.a., Spon] (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Phillipson, M.: New and Improved Technologies and Techniques Defining the Sustainability of Prefabrication and Modular Process in Construction, BRE Scotland (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Turner, C., Partington, R.: Homes through the decades NHBC Foundation, UK (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Waskett, P.: Current Practice and Potential Uses of Prefabrication, DTI Construction Industry Directorate (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Smith, R.: Prefab Architecture: A Guide to Modular Design and Construction. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Serrats, M.: Prefab Houses Design Source. Harper Design International, New York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kates, R.W.P., Leiserowitz, Thomas M., Anthony, A.: What is sustainable development? Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 47(3), 8–21 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. United Nations General Assembly: Report of the world commission on environment and development: Our common future, Oslo, Norway (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Porter, M.E., van der Linde, C.: Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate. Harvard Bus. Rev. 73(5), 120–134 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  20. World Summit on Sustainable Development: Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, A/CONF.199/20, 4 September 2002. http://www.un-documents.net/jburgdec.htm

  21. Enshassi, A., Kochendoerfer, B., Al Ghoul, H.: Factors affecting sustainable performance of construction projects during project life cycle phases. Int. J. Sustain. Constr. Eng. Technol. 7(1), 50–68 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Programme, U. N. E.: Buildings and Climate Change Summary for Decision-Makers. 15 Rue de Milan, Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kibert, C.J.: Sustainable construction: green building design and delivery. Wiley, Hoboken (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kaatz, E., Root, B., Bowen, P.: Broadening project participation through a modified building sustainability assessment. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 33(5), 441–454 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Chen, Y., Okudan, E., Riley, R.: Sustainable performance criteria for construction method selection in concrete buildings. Autom. Constr. 19(2), 235–244 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jaillon, L., Poon, S.: Sustainable construction aspects of using prefabrication in dense urban environment: a Hong Kong case study. Constr. Manag. Econ. 26(9), 953–966 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Yu, C., Kim, J.: Building environmental assessment schemes for rating of IAQ in sustainable buildings. Indoor Built Environ. 20(1), 5–15 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Landman, M.: Breaking through the barriers to sustainable building: insights from building professionals on government initiatives to promote environmentally sound practices. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Urban and Environmental Policy, Tufts University, U.S.A. (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zeng, X., Tam, M., Deng, M., Tam, W.: ISO 14000 and the construction industry: survey in China. J. Manag. Eng. 19(3), 107–115 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Greening Portland’s Affordable Housing Design and Construction Guidelines to Improving Environmental Performance, Tenant Health, and Long-Term Durability in Affordable Housing, Portland Development Commission, City of Portland Green Building Initiative (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Markelj, J., Kitek Kuzman, M., Grošelj, P., Zbašnik-Senegačnik, M.: A simplified method for evaluating building sustainability in the early design phase for architects. Sustainability 6(12), 8775–8795 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bell, P.: Kiwi prefab: prefabricated housing in New Zealand: an historical and contemporary overview with recommendations for the future Architecture and Design. Victoria University of Wellington Victoria University of Wellington Master of Architecture (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bell, P.: Prefab + Green: past, present and future. prefab NZ, Wellington (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Britto, J., et al.: Business plan for green modular housing. School of Environmental Science & Management. Master’s in Environmental Science and Management (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gorgolewski, M.T.: The potential for prefabrication in united kingdom housing to improve sustainability. In: Yang, J. (ed.) Smart & Sustainable Built Environments. Blackwell, Oxford (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  36. BRANZ: Value of time saving in new housing. SR259, BRANZ, New Zealand (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Shahzad, W., et al.: Prefab content versus cost and time savings in construction projects. In: 4th Built Environment Research Symposium (NZBERS), Auckland, New Zealand (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hunt, G.: Valuing the role of construction in the New Zealand economy. PricewaterhouseCoopers, Construction Strategy Group, the Construction Industry Council and BRANZ (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nana, G.: Assessment of the economic impact of efficiency improvements in building and construction, Business and Economic Research Limited (BERL) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Taware, A.K.T., Akshaya, A.: Prefabrication, sustainable technique in building construction. Resincap Int. J. Sci. Eng. 1(2), 44–50 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Khatavkar, J., Joshi, Y.P.: Use of partial prefabrication and non-traditional technology in construction of structure in disaster-prone areas. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. (IJCIET) 6(4), 127–135 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Cook, B.: An Assessment of the Potential Contribution of Prefabrication to Improve the Quality of Housing, Construction Information Quarterly (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Marquit, A.: From Sears & Roebuck to Skyscrapers: A History of Prefabricated and Modular Housing, NYC Buildings (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  44. laili Jabar, I., Ismail, F., Aziz,. A.R.A.: Public participation: enhancing public perception towards IBS implementation. In: Asia Pacific International Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies Berlin, Germany (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

    Milad Moradibistouni, Brenda Vale & Nigel Isaacs

Authors
  1. Milad Moradibistouni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brenda Vale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nigel Isaacs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Milad Moradibistouni .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Griffith Sciences, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Nathan Campus, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Prasad Kaparaju

  2. Bournemouth University and KES International, Shoreham-by-sea, UK

    Robert J. Howlett

  3. Cardiff School of Art & Design, Llandaff Campus, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, UK

    John Littlewood

  4. School of Engineering and Built Environment, Nathan Campus, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Chandima Ekanyake

  5. Griffith Sciences, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Nathan Campus, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Ljubo Vlacic

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Moradibistouni, M., Vale, B., Isaacs, N. (2019). Evaluating Sustainability of Prefabrication Methods in Comparison with Traditional Methods. In: Kaparaju, P., Howlett, R., Littlewood, J., Ekanyake, C., Vlacic, L. (eds) Sustainability in Energy and Buildings 2018. KES-SEB 2018. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 131. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04293-6_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation