Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines
1.2. Research Objectives and Questions
- To define meaningful, context-specific Sustainability Assessment Criteria for bamboo-based building technologies in social housing of the Philippines
- What are requirements, barriers, and opportunities of stakeholders in social housing and for using bamboo as a construction material in this context?
- Which pillars of sustainability are tackled through these requirements?
- In which Sustainability Assessment Criteria can these requirements be translated?
- To define a Strategic Development Roadmap for the alternative building method, which transforms the theoretic criteria and requirements into implementable, measurable results
- What are general strategies for implementing the theoretic context on the ground?
- To which concrete action items lead the strategies for implementation and the Sustainability Criteria?
- Through which methods can measurable results within these action items be generated?
- The paper focuses on presenting Sustainability Assessment Criteria and Strategic Development Roadmap for developing a material potential into a sustainable building technology for social housing. Subject to further research are comprehensive test results about alternative building technology, and a multi-criteria ranking in comparison to conventional building methods. This introductory method paper does therefore not conclude with a recommendation for or against the alternative building technology.
- The paper focuses on building technologies as an entry point for improvement in social housing. Aspects directly related to the value chain of the technology can be shaped or even controlled by technology providers and are therefore analyzed in the paper. However, an innovation in the construction sector does not likely change wider conceptual barriers on sustainable urban development and social housing . An adjustment to such or, at best, influence of it can be achieved by long term multi-stakeholder dialogues and high-level advocacy. For a system change at scale, aspects such as land tenure, housing finance, governance, and policies in urban development, empowerment, and organization of informal communities, income generation for marginalized groups as well as basic services and infrastructure of settlements have to be addressed.
- The paper uses the terminology of an urban context, since this is considered a more conservative boundary condition for the technology to be established on the market. ‘Urban’ relates to the compliance with urban policies and performance requirements. It does not exclude the technology from being applied in rural areas, in which a higher degree of regulatory freedom might exist.
2.1. Definition of Sustainability Assessment Criteria
- Builders and users of traditional bamboo houses,
- Stakeholders involved in using forest products for housing in other parts of the world, and
- Stakeholders in the field of social housing in the Philippines.
- As first level sorting, a barrier or opportunity was coded into one or several pillars of sustainability. This deductive approach bases on existing concepts of sustainability, where it is commonly accepted, that the nature of today’s global problems is complex and multi-dimensional . Five dimensions were adopted for the given case: in line with most common definitions of sustainability , the pillars society, environment, and economy are denominated. Additionally, the relevance of governance is highlighted, especially in development cooperation . Further, when dealing with products, such as in  or this case, the technical performance of products is added as an additional pillar.
- As second level sorting, several sampling strategies, described in , were applied to identify common patterns in the qualitative data: (1) Group characteristic sampling, identifying patterns for several stakeholders in a group without neglecting their diversity, (2) Instrumental-use multi-case sampling, for generating actionable, useful findings, and (3) Comparison-focused sampling, for understanding similarities and differences between cases that can be compared to the present case.
- As third level, Literature review and field observations, where available, were used to triangulate identified requirement patterns.
- When an issue was only expressed by one stakeholder or not expressed or noted at all within the stakeholder group or case, the respective criterion was left empty.
- When an issue was expressed frequently among the stakeholder responses of a group, and it was further described:
- To act as driver, incentive or opportunity for a technology, the respective criterion was assigned with “+”.
- To act as barrier or hindrance for a technology, the respective criterion was assigned with “−”.
- To act in some perspectives as a barrier, in others as an opportunity for a technology, the respective criterion was assigned with “±”.
- Builders and users of traditional bamboo houses: Local bamboo construction practices were documented through field observation in selected areas of known bamboo tradition. Over a period of four years, from 2011 to 2015, a sample size of n = 16 field inspections were conducted as summarized in Table 1. A translator with local dialect was engaged where needed. The interview guide in Appendix, Table A1 was used to obtain data.
|ID No.||Geography||Sample size (No. of Inspections, No. of Construction Practices Per Inspection)||Time Horizon for Inspections|
|1A-1D||Visayas||Western Visayas||Iloilo, Capiz, Aklan, Negros||n = 4, > 10||2011–2015|
|1E-1F||Visayas||Negros||Dumaguete||n = 2, > 10||2014–2015|
|1G||Luzon||Cordillera||Abra||n = 1, > 10||2014|
|1H-1I||Luzon||Central||Tarlac, Pangasinan||n = 2, > 10||2014–2015|
|1J-1M||Luzon||Calabarzon||Laguna, Quezon||n = 4, > 10||2011–2015|
|1N-1O||Luzon||Bicol||Albay, Camarines Sur||n = 2, > 10||2013|
|1P||Mindanao||Davao||Davao||n = 1, > 10||2012|
- Stakeholders involved in using forest products for housing in other parts of the world: For identifying suitable cases for a cross-case pattern analysis, the criterion use of a load-bearing forest product for housing in urban areas was applied. Two cases were identified with significant findings on barriers and opportunities for the existing case. The co-authors brought-in relevant knowhow for each one of the cases (see author contributions). The chosen cases and their sample are stated in Table 2.
|ID No.||Geography||Description||Sample Size (No. of Cases, Methods per Case)||Time Horizon|
|2A||Latin America||Bamboo-based construction||n = 1, field survey, expert review author 1 and 3, literature review||2013|
|2B||European Union||Timber-based construction||n = 2, expert review by author 1 and 4, literature review||2013–2014|
- Stakeholders in the field of social housing in the Philippines: This stakeholder cluster is the most complex and manifold. For capturing the requirements of the cluster, five sub-stakeholder groups were identified through a systemic description of the conceptual framework of social housing in the Philippines by  as well as an analysis of the value chain of bamboo as building material by . For each sub-group, n = 6 individuals were interviewed, resulting to a total of thirty interviews. All interviewed persons had an in-depth understanding of the Philippines, and have either a profession in the commercial or social housing field, or belong to a potential customer group. Half of the interviewees have followed pilot applications for modern bamboo housing over a certain period of time, while the other half had an external perspective. A gender mix between interviewees was considered. Below, the sub-groups are stated in Table 3, together with a description of the sample:
|ID No.||Geography||Description||Sample Size (Background, No. of Stakeholders)||Time Horizon|
|3A||Philippines||Low-income groups and their organizations, Housing clients||Grassroots leaders or individuals from four regions with highest housing need:||2013–2015|
|3B||Philippines and Regional||Policy makers and policy advocators such as international organizations||2013–2015|
|3C||Philippines||Construction sector, housing, or service providers||2013–2015|
|3D||Philippines||Technical professionals, Scientists||2013–2015|
|3E||Philippines||Raw material suppliers||2013–2015|
2.2. Strategic Development Roadmap
|1||Research about the building technology|
|2||Implementation of the building technology|
|3||Participation & Capacity Building of Stakeholders|
|4||Sustainable Supply Chains of raw material|
3.1. Sustainability Assessment Criteria
3.1.1. Findings about Local Practices in Rural Areas of the Pilot Country
|SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA|
|No.||Pillar of Sustainability||Criteria||(1)|
|1||Social acceptance & advocacy||−|
|2||Participation & identification|
|4||Income at local value chain||+|
|5||Maintenance & incremental development||−|
|6||Health & comfort||+|
|7||Enduring safety & performance||−|
|8||Standardization, quality control, pace||-|
|10||Cost advantage of houses||+|
|11||Scalable business model|
|13||Supply availability & sustainability|
|15||Compliance to policies & regulations|
- As per today, buildings using bamboo are based on traditional practices and designs relying on orally transferred skills of local builders. However, a change in building practice was noticed towards conventional technologies. This causes lesser builders to transfer their skills to next generations, which makes bamboo construction less likely an additional source of income. The latter is critical, since only few inhabitants have skills in maintaining a raw material sourced from the countryside. The development of skills and livelihood opportunities through bamboo craftsmanship were highlighted to be relevant criteria expressed during the field study with the rural population and local builders.
- The field study extracted that conventional concrete and steel houses are considered more modern, safer, and less maintenance intensive. The social acceptance of a building method is also largely connected to a contemporary house design. Statistics and survey have shown that the highest share of today’s bamboo users belong to low-income groups who experience shortcomings tapping into more commercial options. The utilization of the material is therefore perceived equivalent to being poor.
- Interviews with inhabitants reveal that a comfortable living climate is a frequently mentioned positive aspect. This said, it is noted, that the definition of “comfort” in the tropical climate of the Philippines has to be classified context specific.
- Statistical information of the Philippine Government revealed that inhabitants living in the traditional lightweight bamboo houses are not ensured of basic safety during natural disasters, especially typhoons . Next to interviews with Government experts, the correlation between vulnerability and bamboo housing has been documented in several post-disaster damage assessment reports after typhoon Haiyan in 2013. Among others, this can be ascribed to temporary connections between the bamboo elements, which not maintained, often underutilize the potential of the raw material as fail as weakest component of the system. As a result, the preferences of people towards conventional technologies, which are considered as more safe, gain further speed. An improved technical performance of bamboo-based houses in compliance with technical minimum standards for disaster resistance is considered as Sustainability Assessment Criterion.
- The abundant availability of bamboo made it ever since an affordable raw material for construction across the archipelago. Cost savings compared to conventional solutions were named a key incentive for using the material.
- Bamboo houses are mostly found in rural communities living nearby bamboo sources, where its craftsmanship provides a valuable source of income next to farming. Since every builder uses bamboo only for a few houses, no shortcomings of supply were noticed.
3.1.2. Findings from Case Studies Using Forest Products for Housing around the Globe
|SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA|
|No.||Pillar of Sustainability||Criteria||Case|
|1||Social acceptance & advocacy||±||+|
|2||Participation & identification|
|4||Income at local value chain|
|5||Maintenance & incremental development|
|6||Health & comfort||+|
|7||Enduring safety & performance||+||+|
|8||Standardization, quality control, pace||+|
|10||Cost advantage of houses||+|
|11||Scalable business model||+|
|13||Supply availability & sustainability||+||+|
|15||Compliance to policies & regulations||+||+|
- Bamboo construction in Latin America:
- In several countries of Latin America, the indigenous population used to live in houses made from bamboo. During the colonial time, European technologies started to influence traditional practices. This was the beginning of the construction technique locally named “Bahareque”: a combination of the original bamboo frame system with cement plaster cladding and an evolvement of skill and capacity. Bahareque spread as success story in Colombia, Ecuador and Peru as a confluence of traditional and new materials and practices. Especially the Coffee Belt Region of Colombia substantial parts of the houses, up to 50 percent, have been built with this construction method in the past 200 years. Similarly to the Asian case, this development was motivated by the high availability of bamboo.
- Further, empiric evidence showed its good response to earthquakes compared to the non-reinforced adobe systems utilized in the area during those days. Due to a high seismic activity in the Colombian Coffee Belt, the system was tested during several seismic shocks. An earthquake with strongly destructive impact took place in 1999. The event of magnitude 6.2 on Richter scale had a shallow depth of 6 km and an epicenter of only 20 km away from major cities, leading to the death of more than 1600 people. Despite the destructive power of the natural disaster, it was remarkable that more than 90 percent of the causalities occurred in non-bamboo structures. Post-impact studies showed that the causalities in or near bamboo houses occurred only due to deterioration of the structural elements or debris from heavy materials destroying the lighter bamboo structures. Therefore, the Association of Structural Engineers in Colombia (AIS) started to study the characteristic behavior of the construction method.
- The idea to standardize and develop a building code for capturing the design rules of this construction type arose, which lead again to several improvements of the construction method. From the year 2000 onwards, tests were carried out in Colombia on the mechanical properties of the local bamboo, called Guadua Angustifolia, according to a preliminary draft of ISO 22157, which was published four years later under the name Bamboo—Determination of physical and mechanical properties [52,53]. Further tests were conducted on frame wall systems and on full-scale buildings to determine its resistance to seismic impacts. The results of these investigations were the basis for the building code, which was published in 2002 and is known today as Colombian Building Code- Section E: Design and Construction of Houses of one and two stories with plastered Bahareque .
- The remarkable technical development, which took place in Latin America, contributed to several extraordinary, globally rewarded structures such as in , which changed the paradigm from a material for the poor to an ecologically valued, high performance material for wealthy customers.
- While this is a considerable track record, the Colombian development has not entered into a large scale application of the building concept, despite the existence of research and regulations. Structures are however implemented on a project basis, and no institutions exist providing affordable construction and after sales services for a large number of cost-efficient houses. Only a few recent social housing projects exist, where it was noted during the field study in Colombia, that the needs and requirements of civil society customers have hardly been considered in the design. A lack of ownership and identification of inhabitants in social housing projects was identified.
- As second main barrier for Latin American bamboo construction to scale are the regulatory barriers in supplying bamboo. Being declared as forest product, special permits are required despite its availability.
- Timber frame construction in Europe
- In Europe, wood is increasingly used in housing, schools, administrative, cultural, and exhibition buildings, halls and factories, as well as in bridges, sound barriers, hydraulic engineering and avalanche control. Its social acceptance varies per country in the EU, but several examples exist where the population adopted it as modern building material with a major share of built environment.
- One driver for this development is a growing market of stakeholders emphasizing ecological concerns. Timber structures are related with CO2 sequestration, being a renewable raw material, producing little construction waste, and requiring low energy for processing. In South Europe, the use of wood is becoming synonym of energy efficient building.
- Moreover, the highest levels of indoor comfort can be obtained with timber structures, which however requires a combination with further building materials.
- Timber engineering is commonly lectured in academe education, which reduces barriers of professionals to train capacity and apply the building material later on.
- The flexibility of lightweight modular timber construction is particularly suited because of its adaptability and pace in construction. Driver for continuous innovation are industrial business models reducing cost per square meter. Industrialized manufacturing methods on a high prefabrication level have significantly advanced building with wood and opened markets for the sector, especially on an urban scale.
- Several European governments are currently deploying programs on building with wood. Two additional building applications are identified as potential markets: multi-story large volume new buildings, as well as retrofitting using timber based solutions. Both have been successfully realized and are now on the way to up scaling, in Europe.
- In order for innovative wood-based building methods to be approved on the European market, the European Technical Approval scheme has to be considered . For decades, the fire resistance resulted in a barrier of timber construction for multi-story buildings , while once technically solved, it opened the market for more applications. Compliance with rules and regulations, ensuring a durable technical performance, is however a must for an application in the EU.
- However, building with wood sector faces a growing intrusive environment of legal frameworks, critical public perception as well as a rising economical threat which is becoming a barrier to a successful future economic development of the wood industry.
- Supply availability & sustainability: regional scale, approval schemes.
3.1.3. Learnings from Stakeholder Requirements in Social Housing of the Philippines
|SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA|
|No.||Pillar of Sustainability||Criteria||(3)|
|1||Social acceptance & advocacy||+|
|2||Participation & identification||+|
|4||Income at local value chain||+|
|5||Maintenance & incremental development||+|
|6||Health & comfort||+|
|7||Enduring safety & performance||+|
|8||Standardization, quality control, pace||+|
|10||Cost advantage of houses||+|
|11||Scalable business model||+|
|13||Supply availability & sustainability||+|
|15||Compliance to policies & regulations||+|
- Lower initial construction costs were mentioned as major incentive to consider alternative building methods across all stakeholder groups, since latter will allow more people to access adequate housing. Economic advantages are therefore an important entry point for system change, however, not the only requirement for an innovation to succeed on the social housing market.
- Facilitating regulations and a legal approval of the building technology on national or even regional or global scale are needed for a technology spread. Since, however, the alternative building technology is not covered by existing building codes, but restricted by general requirement in force; compliance to such and design rules for it have to be developed. Little enforcement of minimum structural performance requirements in social housing make substandard practices likely and might slow down the spread of a performing technology.
- Showcasing the technology at full scale, for example through demonstration units, as well as national, regional, and global best practice sharing and advocacy, have been mentioned to be needed for assessing customer acceptance. Customer acceptance and first positive sales results are promising from the current start-up operations in the Philippines. It is acknowledged, though, that this acceptance is driven to large parts by the urgency of an underserved market and the need for more adequate housing, which the technology provides a good solution for.
- The interviews revealed that the value chain is an important criterion, which can create local impact from cradle-to-grave: from resource planting up to the demolition of houses built with it. Relevant barriers and risks for an application at scale, though, are also caused by this value chain. Existing bamboo supply chains have to be adjusted and scaled according to the needs of the technology.
- Critically mentioned were further the material availability and long term sustainability of bamboo supply, which will influence the pace and dimension of a technology scale-up. Both, market-prices for bamboo and quality grading have to be established for affordable, performing construction. Training on sustainable harvesting of bamboo has to fall in line with a logistic concept for accessing the resources and bringing it to the processing sites. It is predicted that increasing harvesting yield and efficiency is a time intensive process. Involvement and strengthening networks of existing bamboo suppliers is deemed important for immediate supply. It was mentioned as an asset, that the value chain can create rural-urban linkages combining two governmental targets: Rural farmers receiving livelihood opportunities through material supply and urban poor being clients for housing. The factors pace of scale-up and absolute scale intended are crucial for a strategy definition. The ecological impact reduction through utilization of renewable, available raw materials creates policy incentives for the government, which can mobilize multi-stakeholder involvement for the needed supply and construction related capacity building. The environmental impact has to be proven transparently.
- Cross-cutting through all six stakeholder clusters is the trajectory of capacity building: continuous skills development for stable minimum quality insurance is a requirement, both in supply as well as construction. This is a sensitive process, where local practices and learnings from global sharing have to be merged culturally sensitive. It involves all levels of stakeholders, from low-skilled to skilled workers and academe.
- The interviewed stakeholders highlighted that investing into a residential home is a long term commitment for most people. A new building practice causes customers and loan providers to hesitate taking the risk. Due to the disaster prone context of the Philippines, a reliable technical performance ensuring people’s safety has been mentioned as important. A comprehensive technical development is the basis for such a reliability and durability enabling trust. As seen in the case of Colombia, a convincing system performance will create a track record for the technology. During interviews with stakeholders involved in the technology development, this knowledge has resulted in solid trust into the technology. The South-South sharing has increased speed of gaining such a knowledge basis. Besides disaster resistance, stakeholders from low-income groups expressed their strong desire to obtain durable houses causing little maintenance efforts. To be highlighted is also the relevance of a strong quality control concept ensuring a stable technical performance in implementation projects.
- A continuous process of optimization and innovation in prefabrication and construction will increase the speed of construction, decrease the level of skills needed, and strengthen the scalability of the approach.
- It was underlined both by potential clients and facilitators, that incremental expansion and upgrading along with societal development is common reality and should be enabled.
- Inclusion of low income groups is a pathway to success, since conventional modes of house provision are mostly not affordable and do not consider the factor of ownership. The participatory process gives consideration to the concerns of clients in planning, construction and post-occupation.
3.1.4. Sustainability Assessment Criteria
|SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA|
|No.||Pillar of Sustainability||Criteria||Case|
|1||Social acceptance & advocacy||-||±||+||+|
|2||Participation & identification||+|
|4||Income at local value chain||+||+|
|5||Maintenance & incremental development||-||+|
|6||Health & comfort||+||+||+|
|7||Enduring safety & performance||-||+||+||+|
|8||Standardization, quality control, pace||-||+||+|
|10||Cost advantage of houses||+||+||+|
|11||Scalable business model||+||+|
|13||Supply availability & sustainability||+||+||+|
|15||Compliance to policies & regulations||+||+||+|
3.2. Strategic Technology Development Roadmap
- The Research Strategy was segmented in research topics on material, system, and building scales, as visualized in Figure 7. Data generated in these three dimensions enables to understand and control the technical performance, and with that contribute to social acceptance through compliance with urban policies. The action items cover all pillars of sustainability and are summarized in Figure 8. For a sustainable urban development, the complex settlement scale would also require consideration. Latter is however hardly tied to a specific construction method and is therefore not part of this technology-related roadmap.
- The research strategy is complemented with a parallel, slightly time shifted implementation strategy, which contains selected implementation actions. Latter cover the pillars Technology, Society and Economy. With 7 of the 15 Sustainability Criteria, an implementation strategy at scale and robust quality is shaped: Quality Control for robust technical performance, Ease of Application and Skill Development, Construction speed and scalability, Innovation through participation and evaluation of practicability of concepts, as displayed in Figure 9. Finally, previously theoretical Economic Indicators were verified through implementation projects. It can be noted, that all criteria were already considered in the System Scale and Building Scale research strategy and are now verified through application in the field. In 2012, six demonstration houses were built, since then another 150 houses have been implemented .
- Stakeholder participation, capacity building and a close interaction between low-income groups, professionals, governments and further stakeholder groups was reflected through a strategy on stakeholder involvement, displayed in Figure 12. The participatory process gives consideration to the need and concerns of low-income groups in planning, construction, and post-occupation. The strategy describes where and how participation and capacity building has been integrated in the technology development. Continuous process simplifications and parallel skill development facilitate involvement of people. Post occupational customer acceptance testing according to corporate standards allow to identify further innovation potentials and are therefore connected to the area ‘innovation’ in the implementation roadmap. Policy approval and expansion has been targeted through national, regional and global best practice sharing and advocacy and is connected to the area of legal approval under research.
- Further, the technology application at larger scale requires a sustainably generated, accessible supply of quality graded bamboo. Bamboo has to become a standardized, reliable forest product in the Philippines. In the field surveys and interviews, this was highlighted as critical item and therefore specified as one of the implementation strategies. Existing bamboo stands have to be identified through field surveys and/or more technologic aerial mapping. Forming of supply networks and harvesting trainings the management of these stands can be strengthened and sustainable harvesting amounts determined. Durable, reliable, raw material quality has to be produced through a defined drying, storage, and treatment process, which follows quality control, environmental- and health-criteria as well as efficient technical processes. Research on treatment methods is one essential component for bamboo, since there is no scientific recommendation without bottlenecks available as per today. All items on the road map are summarized in Figure 13.
- This paper derives Sustainability Assessment Criteria through qualitative research methods such as interviews and field observations. Science debates about the validity of qualitative assessments in comparison to quantitative ones. Seemingly less transparent evaluation methods are among the most common criticisms, which is opposed by researchers describing the strength of qualitative data analysis [44,70], when carried out systematically and holistically. Typically, qualitative sample sizes are limited, but rich in data . The paper addresses the concerns through a systematic data generation and content analysis including coding, sorting and sifting of data. The evaluation of qualitative data is moreover based on human characteristics, understanding, knowledge, and social context allowing for an encyclopedic evaluation of an issue or case . The paper has overcome the risk of biased findings through scientifically recognized validation methods such as: triangulation through multiple sources, long-term engagement in the field, application of multiple methods to validate findings, and the evaluation through more than one observer or author.
- This paper looks at an innovation potential, for which data has to be generated first, before it can be compared. The results can therefore be understood as Part 1 of a MCDM. Once all suggested data sets are generated and comprehensively evaluated, a holistic performance comparison between the alternative and the conventional building method is enabled. At this point, a Part 2 of the paper is suggested, which will provide a technology raking and recommendation for decision-makers.
- This paper assesses an alternative method for house construction in the socio-economic and geographic boundaries of the Philippines. In  it is highlighted, that there is a call for Sustainability Assessments to transfer from local to global level. A fine balance is to strike for creating sufficiently meaningful data for the local context, and the wish to create valid generalizations and transfers . Sustainability assessments in Development Cooperation are often found to be specific, e.g. due to their specific cultural context . While this paper assessed the Philippine context of social housing, the strategic approach for creating sustainable building solutions has general validity for the tropical context and low-rise construction. It can therefore be adapted to other bamboo growing countries under integration of local specifications. The Philippines, with its natural disasters, its low affordability and high poverty, represents further a challenging environment for a building technology and can therefore be seen as pathfinder for an expansion in Asia-Pacific or around the globe. However, for it to be successfully applied at scale, a complex set of wider interlinked aspects has to be tackled.
- For increasing the impact of Sustainability Assessments, a transfer from product to sector level is suggested in . This paper captures stakeholder requirements on the sector level of social housing. The organic material bamboo brings about requirements, which are nearest to the sectors of other forest products. Nevertheless, its specific supply chain and technical construction concepts remains connected to bamboo and requires adjustment when other materials are considered.
Conflicts of Interest
|No.||Stakeholder Clusters: (1) Inhabitants of Traditional Bamboo Houses in the Philippines and (3A) Low Income Groups in Need of Social Housing|
|1||Since when have you lived in your current house, with how many family members do you live there and what is the size of the house?|
|2||What is the material your current house is made from? Why did you choose it?|
|3||How do you like living in your current house? Have you ever lived in a different house? How was it in comparison to now?|
|4||Have you been involved in the construction of your house?|
|5||Do you know where the materials of your house were sourced?|
|6||Do you feel save in your house during earthquakes or typhoons? Have you experienced damage to your house during extreme impacts?|
|7||What is your current source of income? How high is your monthly income?|
|8||How much did you spend for the construction of your house? Do you still pay the installments?|
|9||How often do you have to maintain your house?|
|10||Which building method would you prefer if you could freely choose?|
|No.||Stakeholder Clusters: Building Sector using Forest Products in (2A) Latin America and (2B) Europe|
|1||At which scale is the forest product being used for house construction today/What is its current market share? What is the track record of the technology?|
|2||Among which customer group is the building technology applied the most?|
|3||What is the dominating perception towards this building technology- by its users and non-users? How is the customer acceptance of the technology in general?|
|4||Were or are there major barriers hindering the application of a building technology using bamboo in the pillars economy, ecology, society, technology, or governance?|
|5||Were or are there major drivers/opportunities supporting the application of a building technology using bamboo in the pillars economy, ecology, society, technology, or governance?|
|6||What roles do human skills and capacity building play?|
|7||What is the common construction process and how relevant are specific optimization processes/concepts?|
|8||What role does research and development and innovation play in general?|
|9||What role does the supply chain play?|
|10||What roles do government policies or incentives and environmental concerns play?|
|No.||Stakeholder Clusters: Stakeholders in Social Housing in the Philippines (3B–3D)|
|1||How big is the housing need in the social housing segment? How many houses are currently supplied by your organization specifically and private sector, government, NGOs or self-build homes in general? Is there a gap between supply and need?|
|2||What are requirements in social housing, how would you describe the needed value proposition?|
|3||What are the most common building materials and concepts applied in low-cost housing segments?|
|4||What role does perception towards a building material for its success at the market play and how do you evaluate the perception of bamboo today?|
|5||Were or are there major barriers hindering the application of a building technology using bamboo in the pillars economy, ecology, society, technology, or governance?|
|6||Were or are there major drivers / opportunities supporting the application of a building technology using bamboo in the pillars economy, ecology, society, technology, or governance?|
|7||What roles do human skills and capacity building play?|
|8||What is the common construction process and how relevant are specific optimization processes/concepts?|
|9||What role does research and development and innovation in general play?|
|10||What roles do supply chains play?|
|11||What roles do government policies or incentives and environmental concerns play?|
|No.||Stakeholder Clusters: Raw Material Suppliers for Housing Made from Bamboo (3E)|
|1||Which bamboo species do you sell?|
|2||In which quantity this species would be harvestable?|
|3||What is the regular price for bamboo for purchase at harvesting location?|
|4||Do you regularly supply customers with bamboo or just provide it on an occasion/demand basis?|
|5||Can the bamboo be delivered to collection points and what are prices including this transportation?|
|6||What is the timeline from harvesting to delivery and which mode of transport would be chosen?|
|7||Are there any middle men, consolidators, or sub-contractors involved?|
|8||What is the income share between land owner, harvester, and transport?|
|9||Is bamboo supply the only source of income or one among others?|
|10||Would you be interested in extending your bamboo business in the future?|
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)-SBCI. Buildings and Climate Change: Summary for Decision-Makers; UNEP: Paris, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN Habitat). Sustainable Housing for Sustainable Cities: A Policy Framework for Developing Countries; UN Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects (SIA). SIA 112 /1—Nachhaltiges Bauen—Hochbau; SIA: Zurich, Switzerland, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN Habitat). Going Green: A Handbook of Sustainbale Housing Practices in Developing Countries; UN Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya; United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific: Bangkok, Thailand, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Sustainable Solutions for Social Housing: Guidelines for Project Developers; UNEP: Nairobi, Kenya, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). State of the World's Cities; UN-Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN-ESCAP); United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). The State of Asian Cities 2010/2011; UN-ESCAP: Bangkok, Thailand; UN-Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Cinco, T. Sever Wind Impacts and Vulnerability of Housing to Such; Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical, and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA): Quezon City, Philippines, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Association of Structural Engineers Philippines. Post-Disaster Damage Assessment—Earthquake Bohol Philippines, 2013; ASEP: Quezon, Philippines, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN Habitat)-Philippines. Country Programme Document 2008–2009 Philippines; UN Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Fifth Assessment Report Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Wallbaum, H.; Ostermeyer, Y.; Salzer, C.; Escamilla, E.Z. Indicator based sustainability assessment tool for affordable housing construction technologies. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 18, 353–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rizvi, Z.M. Pro-poor housing: An idea whose time has come. Hous. Financ. Int. 2010, 24, 15–20. [Google Scholar]
- Forest Products Research and Development Institute (FPRDI). Utilization, Collection and Trade of Tropical Non-Wood Forest Products in the Philippines; FPRDI: Los Banos, Philippines, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Waas, T.; Hugé, J.; Block, T.; Wright, T.; Benitez-Capistros, F.; Verbruggen, A. Sustainability Assessment and Indicators: Tools in a Decision-Making Strategy for Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2014, 6, 5512–5534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Feige, A.; Wallbaum, H.; Krank, S. Harnessing stakeholder motivation: Towards a Swiss sustainable building sector. Build. Res. Inf. 2011, 39, 504–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mendoza, G.A.; Martins, H. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. For. Ecol. Manag. 2006, 230, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turcksin, L.; Macharis, C.; Lebeau, K.; Boureima, F.; van Mierlo, J.; Bram, S.; de Ruyck, J.; Mertens, L.; Jossart, J.M.; Gorissen, L.; et al. A multi-actor multi-criteria framework to assess the stakeholder support for different biofuel options: The case of Belgium. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 200–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Passel, S.; Meul, M. Multilevel and multi-user sustainability assessment of farming systems. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2012, 32, 170–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermote, L.; Macharis, C.; Putman, K. A road network for freight transport in flanders: Multi-actor multi-criteria assessment of alternative ring ways. Sustainability 2013, 5, 4222–4246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mardani, A.; Jusoh, A.; Zavadskas, E.; Cavallaro, F.; Khalifah, Z. Sustainable and renewable energy: An overview of the application of multiple criteria decision making techniques and approaches. Sustainability 2015, 7, 13947–13984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.J.; Jing, Y.Y.; Zhang, C.F.; Zhao, J.H. Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 2263–2278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zurbrügg, C.; Caniato, M.; Vaccari, M. How Assessment Methods Can Support Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries—A Critical Review. Sustainability 2014, 6, 545–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cobacho, B.; Caballero, R.; González, M.; Molina, J. Planning federal public investment in Mexico using multiobjective decision making. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2009, 61, 1328–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mardani, A.; Jusoh, A.; Zavadskas, E.K. Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications—Two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Syst. Appl. 2015, 42, 4126–4148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akadiri, P.O.; Olomolaiye, P.O.; Chinyio, E.A. Multi-criteria evaluation model for the selection of sustainable materials for building projects. Autom. Constr. 2013, 30, 113–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Contreras-miranda, W.; Cloquell-ballester, V.; de Contreras, O. Las técnicas de decisión multicriterio en la selección de componentes estructurales, a partir de la tecnología de la madera, para construcción de viviendas sociales en Venezuela. Madera Y Bosques 2010, 16, 7–22. [Google Scholar]
- Mulliner, E.; Smallbone, K.; Maliene, V. An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method. Omega 2013, 41, 270–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Medineckiene, M.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Björk, F.; Turskis, Z. Multi-criteria decision-making system for sustainable building assessment/certification. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2015, 15, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tupenaite, L.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Kaklauskas, A.; Turskis, Z.; Seniut, M. Multiple criteria assessment of alternatives for built and human environment renovation. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2010, 16, 257–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacHaris, C.; Turcksin, L.; Lebeau, K. Multi actor multi criteria analysis (MAMCA) as a tool to support sustainable decisions: State of use. Decis. Support Syst. 2012, 54, 610–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zijp, M.; Heijungs, R.; van der Voet, E.; van de Meent, D.; Huijbregts, M.; Hollander, A.; Posthuma, L. An Identification Key for Selecting Methods for Sustainability Assessments. Sustainability 2015, 7, 2490–2512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Reed, M.S. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141, 2417–2431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bal, M.; Bryde, D.; Fearon, D.; Ochieng, E. Stakeholder engagement: Achieving sustainability in the construction sector. Sustainability 2013, 5, 695–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lundholm, C.; Stöhr, C. Stakeholder Dialogues and Shared Understanding: The Case of Co-Managing Fisheries in Sweden. Sustainability 2014, 6, 4525–4536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Institute of Development Studies (IDS). Community-Driven Disaster Risk Management and Reduction in the Philippines; IDS: Satterthwaite, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Thabrew, L.; Wiek, A.; Ries, R. Environmental decision making in multi-stakeholder contexts: Applicability of life cycle thinking in development planning and implementation. J. Clean. Prod. 2009, 17, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grafakos, S.; Flamos, A.; Enseñado, E. Preferences matter: A constructive approach to incorporating local stakeholders’ preferences in the sustainability evaluation of energy technologies. Sustainability 2015, 7, 10922–10960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraser, E.D.G.; Dougill, A.J.; Mabee, W.E.; Reed, M.; McAlpine, P. Bottom up and top down: Analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. J. Environ. Manag. 2006, 78, 114–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Patton, M.Q. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods Integrating Theory and Practice, 4th ed.; SAGE: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, R.K.; Murty, H.R.; Gupta, S.K.; Dikshit, A.K. An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 15, 281–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our Common Future: World Commission on Environment and Development; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Sustainable Building Policies in Developing Countries (SPOD): Promoting sustainable building and construction practices; UNEP: Paris, France, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Chowdhury, M.F. Coding, sorting and sifting of qualitative data analysis: Debates and discussion. Qual. Quant. 2015, 49, 1135–1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wehmer, N.; United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN-ESCAP). A Conceptual Framework for Social Housing in the Philippines; UN-ESCAP: Bangkok, Thailand, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Base- An Initative of Hilti Foundation. Base- Sustainable and Resilient Social Housing in the Philippines. 2015. Available online: http://www.base-builds.com/ (accessed on 30 November 2015).
- Pope, J.; Annandale, D.; Morrison-Saunders, A. Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2004, 24, 595–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krank, S.; Wallbaum, H. Lessons from seven sustainability indicator programs in developing countries of Asia. Ecol. Indic. 2011, 11, 1385–1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Homeless People’s Federation of the Philippines. Homeless People’s Federation of the Philippines. Available online: http://www.achr.net/index.php (accessed on 30 November 2015).
- Paudel, S.K.; Lobovikov, M. Bamboo housing: Market potential for low-income groups. J. Bamboo Rattan 2003, 2, 381–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ostermeyer, Y.; Wallbaum, H.; Reuter, F. Multidimensional Pareto optimization as an approach for site-specific building refurbishment solutions applicable for life cycle sustainability assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2013, 18, 1762–1779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 22157—1 Bamboo—Determination of Physical and Mechanical Properties—Part 1: Requirements; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 22157—2 Bamboo—Determination of Physical and Mechanical Properties—Part 2: Laboratory Manual; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1989; Volume 53, p. 160. [Google Scholar]
- Association of Seismic Engineers Colombia. NSR-10: Section E: One and two-Story Structures from Bahareque; AIS: Bogota, Colombia, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Villegas, M. New Bamboo Architecture and Design; Villegas Editores: Bogota, Colombia, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- European Organization for Technical Assessment. European Technical Approval Guidelines (ETAGs). Available online: http://www.eota.eu/en-GB/content/etags-used-as-ead/26/ (accessed on 30 November 2015).
- Östman, B.; Källsner, B. National Building Regulations in Relation to Multi-Storey Wooden Buildings in Europe; SP Trätek Växjö University: Kalmar, Sweden, 2011; pp. 1–26. [Google Scholar]
- European Standard. EN 594 Timber Structures—Test Methods—Racking Strength and Stiffness of Timber Frame Wall Panels; European Standardisation Organisations: Brussels, Belgium, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Housing Technology Development Office (HTDO). Manual on Accreditation of Innovative Technologies for Housing; Housing Technology Development Office Philippines, National Housing Authority: Quezon City, Philippines, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB). Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations for Economic and Socialized Housing Projects—B.P. 220; HLURB: Quezon, Philippines, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO). EN ISO 7726—Indoor Climate: Instruments for Physical Measurement; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 14044-Environmental Management, Life Cycle Assessment, Requirements and Guidelines; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 21581 Timber Structures—Static and Cyclic Lateral Load Test Methods for Shear Walls; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS). JIS A 1304—Method of fire resistance test for structural parts of buildings. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2011, 53, 160. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Elements of Building Construction—Part 1: General Requirements; Fire-Resistance Tests; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1999; Volume ISO 834–1, p. 25. [Google Scholar]
- Association of Structural Engineers Philippines. National Structural Code of the Philippines, Volume 1—Buildings, Towers and Other Vertical Structures, 6th ed.; ASEP: Quezon, Philippines, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- De Dear, R.J.; Brager, G.S. Thermal comfort in naturally ventilated buildings: Revisions to ASHRAE Standard 55. Energy Build. 2002, 34, 549–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 22156—Bamboo—Structural Design; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Association of Structural Engineers Philippines. National Structural Code of the Philippines, Volume 3—Residential Housing, 1st ed.; ASEP: Quezon, Philippines, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Pierre, E.A.S.; Jackson, A.Y. Qualitative Data Analysis After Coding. Qual. Inq. 2014, 20, 715–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, R.K. Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation 2013, 19, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hugé, J.; Mukherjee, N.; Fertel, C.; Waaub, J.P.; Block, T.; Waas, T.; Koedam, N.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F. Conceptualizing the Effectiveness of Sustainability Assessment in Development Cooperation. Sustainability 2015, 7, 5735–5751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Salzer, C.; Wallbaum, H.; Lopez, L.F.; Kouyoumji, J.L. Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines. Sustainability 2016, 8, 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8020151
Salzer C, Wallbaum H, Lopez LF, Kouyoumji JL. Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines. Sustainability. 2016; 8(2):151. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8020151Chicago/Turabian Style
Salzer, Corinna, Holger Wallbaum, Luis Felipe Lopez, and Jean Luc Kouyoumji. 2016. "Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines" Sustainability 8, no. 2: 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8020151