Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 13 results ...
af Hällström, A, Bosch-Sijtsema, P and Poblete, L (2025) Challenges with collaboration: the interaction of formal and informal ties in infrastructure construction. Construction Management and Economics, 43(01), 7–25.
Bresnen, M, Lennie, S and Marshall, N (2025) Partnering in construction re-visited: gauging progress in industry practice and prospects for advances in academic research. Construction Management and Economics, 43(01), 59–77.
Cole, R J and Fedoruk, L (2015) Shifting from net-zero to net-positive energy buildings. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 111-20.
Georges, L, Haase, M, Houlihan Wiberg, A, Kristjansdottir, T and Risholt, B (2015) Life cycle emissions analysis of two nZEB concepts. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 82-93.
Gibberd, J (2015) Measuring capability for sustainability: the Built Environment Sustainability Tool (BEST). Building Research & Information, 43(01), 49-61.
Joustra, C M and Yeh, D H (2015) Framework for net-zero and net-positive building water cycle management. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 121-32.
Lützkendorf, T, Foliente, G, Balouktsi, M and Wiberg, A H (2015) Net-zero buildings: incorporating embodied impacts. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 62-81.
Nilsson Vestola, E, Larsson, J and Hedgren, E (2025) Public clients pursue innovation, but what’s going on at the project level? A case study of infrastructure operation and maintenance. Construction Management and Economics, 43(01), 26–39.
Pan, W and Ning, Y (2015) A socio-technical framework of zero-carbon building policies. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 94-110.
Pearl, D S and Oliver, A (2015) The role of 'early-phase mining' in reframing net-positive development. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 34-48.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords:
- ISBN/ISSN: 0961-3218
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.939511
- Abstract:
The term ’net-positive development’ has gained significant recognition by both academics and professionals, especially in architecture. A net-positive development increases or creates economic, social and ecological capital(s) and makes a positive contribution to ecosystem services. Designing how excess resources may be used beyond a site’s boundary is a very appealing notion, but difficult to put into practice without the tools and methods to support net-positive development. The effectiveness and potential impact on community design of net-positive development is questioned when its evaluation is limited to a quantitative analysis only. A broader definition of net positive is offered that equally places social dimensions alongside ecological health through ’mining’ for synergies and leverage points in the early stages of a design project. An emphasis is placed on the undervalued first step in the design process of ’mining: evaluating the dormant, inherent potential’. This can be done through a process of questioning the conventional parameters of a context’s predefined limits. A framework is also provided that can prove beneficial at this phase. It is posited that strong mining can provide full-spectrum change where true positive benefits, on multiple scales and for multiple stakeholder interests, are achieved.
Premakumara, A and Siriwardana, C (2025) A comprehensive approach for assessing the causes of low productivity in the construction sector: a systematic categorization and ranking using Pareto and Fuzzy analysis. Construction Management and Economics, 43(01), 40–58.
Renger, B C, Birkeland, J L and Midmore, D J (2015) Net-positive building carbon sequestration. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 11-24.
Torcellini, P, Pless, S and Leach, M (2015) A pathway for net-zero energy buildings: creating a case for zero cost increase. Building Research & Information, 43(01), 25-33.