PERCEPTION OF SELECTED TYPES OF FAMILY HOUSES WITH REGARD TO WOOD-BASED STRUCTURES
Keywords:
innovation, buildings, wood-based structures, construction, design, attitudesAbstract
Sustainable development is the topic associated with economic growth, and it is discussed with the need to find a way how to satisfy requirements of the present generation without compromising the limits of future generations, guaranteeing the balance between economic growth, care for the environment and social well-being. This idea is analysed within different industries including the building industry looking for the possibilities to meet housing demands in accordance with environmental and health requirements. Therefore, the importance of innovation in the building construction material for sustainable growth focusing on wood-based structures represented by eco-innovation and alternatives to brick buildings in this context is still growing. The results of the survey aimed at investigating the perception of respondents towards various construction types of buildings with reference to reverse thinking is presented in the paper. A questionnaire survey was applied allowing to collect information based on the answers of the investigated sample of respondents in Slovakia to various facts regarding their perception of selected construction types of buildings. Subsequently, the obtained facts were compared to find out the influence of construction type on the choice of family houses of the respondents and, paradoxically, the design effect if they did not have more information about the construction type. Based on the results, the design of family houses significantly influences the decision-making of respondents when choosing a family house unless they have more specific information about its construction.
References
Alapieti, T., Mikkola, R., Pasanen, P., Salonen, H. 2020. The Influence Of Wooden Interior Materials On Indoor Environment: A Review. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products 78, 617–634, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-020-01532-x
Armstrong, S. 2019. Klimatická kríza robí z miest neobývateľné miesta. Je čas ísť pod zem. URL: https://krtkodom.sk/klimaticka-kriza-robi-z-miest-neobyvatelne-miesta-je-cas-ist-pod-zem/
Autio, M., Heiskanen, E., Heinonen, V. 2009. Narratives of “Green” consumers–the antihero, the environmental hero and the anarchist. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 8, 40–53.
Beamish, A., Donovan, W. 1989. Village-level brickmaking. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn.
Bourdeau, L. 1999. Sustainable development and the future of construction: a comparison of visions from various countries. Building Research & Information 27, 354-366.
Bragança, L., Mateus, R., Koukkari, H. 2010. Building Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability 2, 2010-2023.
Bývanie SK. 2017. Drevodom, montovaný dom, nízkoenergetický dom alebo pasívny dom? Kto sa v tom má vyznať? URL: https://byvaniesk.sk/nove-byvanie/montovany-nizkoenergeticky-pasivny
Chráska, M. 2000. Základy výzkumu v pedagogice. Olomouc: VUP.
Espinoza, O., Trujillo, V.R. Mallo, M.F.L., Buehlmann, U. 2016. Cross-laminated timber: status and research needs in Europe BioRes 11, 281-295.
Farkašová, E., Baďura, R. 2021. Understandings of design in circumstances of humanity. Acta Facultatis Xylologiae Zvolen 63, 143-150.
Farkašová, E., Petránsky, Ľ. 2020. Design teória a metodológia 1. Technická univerzita vo Zvolene: Zvolen.
Ginsberg, J. M., Bloom, P. 2004. Choosing the right green marketing strategy. In MIT Sloan management review.Messachusetts Institute of Technology. Vol 46. No 1. 2004. p. 79.- 84
Gosselin, A., Blanchet, P., Lehoux, N., Cimon, Y. 2016. Main Motivations and Barriers for Using Wood in Multi- Story and Non-Residential Construction Projects. Bioresources 12. 546-570. 10.15376/biores.12.1.546-570.
Gracovský, R., Danihelová, A., Tereňová, Ľ., Štefková, J. 2020. The Model Fire Resistance Test of Flame Retardant Treated Clay Plastered Wall Modelový test požiarnej odolnosti retardačne upravenej hlinenej omietky. Delta, 14(1), 30-39.
Hansmann, R., Köllner, T., Scholz, R.W. 2006. Influence of consumers’ socio ecological and economic orientations on preferences for wood products with sustainability labels. Forest Policy and Economics 8, 239-250.
Harju, C. 2022. The perceived quality of timber structure materials—A systematic literature review and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies 46, 29– 55. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12764
HemstrӦm, K., Mahapatra, K., Leif, G. 2011. Perceptions, attitudes and interest of Swedish architects towards the use of wood frames in multi-storey buildings. Resources Conservation and Recycling 55. 1013-1021.
Herczeg, M., Mckinnon, D., Milios, L., Bakas, I., Klaassens, E., Svatikova, K., Widerberg, O. 2014. Resource efficiency in the building sector. Final report for DG Environment. ECORYS and Copenhagen Resource Institute.
Hoibo,O., Hansen,E., Nybakk,E., 2015. Building material preferences with a focus on wood in urban housing: durability and environmental impacts Canadian Journal of Forest Research 45,1617–1627.
Hurmekoski, E., Hetemäki, L., Lidenn, M. 2015. Factors affecting sawnwood consumption in Europe. In Forest Policy and Economics 50, 236-248.
InBlok. 2022. Krtkodom pre svahovitý terén. URL: https://inblok.sk/krtkodom/.
Kalamárová, M., Parobek, J., Loučanová, E., Trebuňa, P. 2014. Competitiveness evaluation of the Slovak forest industry. Position and role of the forest based sector in the green economy : proceedings of scientific papers. Zagreb: International Association for Economics and Management in Wood Processing and Furniture Manufacturing - WoodEMA, 58-62.
Kaputa, V., Táborecká, J., Oravcová Triznová, M., Nosáľová, M. 2022. Market of wooden apartment buildings. Crisis management and safety foresight in forest-based sector and SMEs operating in the global environment: proceedings, 163-170. URL: http://www.woodema.org/proceedings/WoodEMA_2022_Proceedings.pdf.
Keith, K. E. 2011. Dangerous decor: Consumer knowledge of health risks within interior spaces. San Jose State University.
Kotler, P., Keller, K., 2016. Marketing management. ISBN: 978-1-292-09262
Lähtinen, K., Harju, Ch., Toppinen, A. 2019. Consumers’ perceptions on the properties of wood affecting their willingness to live in and prejudices against houses made of timber, Wood Material Science & Engineering 14, 325-331.
Leszczyszyn, E., Heräjärvi, H., Verkasalo, E., Garcia-Jaca, J., Araya-Letelier, G., Lanvin, J-D., Bidzińska, G., Augustyniak-Wysocka, D., Kies, U., Calvillo, A., Wahlströmh, M., Kouyoumji J-L. 2022. The Future of Wood Construction: Opportunities and Barriers Based on Surveys in Europe and Chile. Sustainability 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074358
Loft, G. 2021. Sophia house. URL: https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=4529362547122395&set=oa.289992203128182.
Loučanová, E., Kalamárová, M., Olšiaková, M. 2017. The importance of innovation in building materials in terms of sustainable growth. Intercathedra 33, 7-11.
Loučanová, E., Olšiaková, M. 2020. Identification of customers' drivers for the wood building as an ecological innovation in building construction in Slovakia. Acta Facultatis Xylologiae Zvolen 62, 177-188.
Loučanová, E., Parobek, J., Kalamárová, M., Paluš, H., Lenoch, J. 2015. Eco-innovation performance of Slovakia. Procedia - economics and finance 26, 920-924.
Mešťanová. Ľ. 2019. Aké výhody majú kontajnerové domy? Napríklad aj nižšiu cenu a moderný vzhľad. URL: https://domadoma.sk/kontajnerove-domy/
Mitterpach, J., Štefko, J. 2016. An environmental impact of a wooden and brick house by the LCA Method. Key Engineering Materials. Trans Tech Publications Ltd, 204-209.
Murovany dom. 2022. URL: https://www.murovany-dom.sk/
O’Brien, K.A. Teisl M.F. 2004. Eco-information and its effect on consumer values for environmentally certified forest products. Journal of Forest Economics 10, 75-76.
O'CONNOR, M. 2022. WHAT IS A SHIPPING CONTAINER HOME? URL: https://containerhomehub.com/what-is-a-shipping-container-home/
Naturallywood.com. 2023. Prefabricated wood building systems. URL: https://www.naturallywood.com/topics/prefabrication
Olšiaková, M., Loučanová, E., Kalamárová, M. 2017. Application of new trends of marketing communication as a competitiveness tool in furniture industry. More wood, better management, increasing effectiveness: starting points and perspective: proceedings of scientific papers. Prague : Czech University of Life Sciences Prague ; Zagreb : WoodEMA.
Olšiaková, M., Loučanová, E., Paluš, H. 2016. Monitoring changes in consumer requirements for wood products in terms of consumer behavior. Acta Facultatis Xylologiae Zvolen 58, 137-147.
Paluš, H., Parobek, J., Dzian, M., Šupín, M. 2018. Determinants of Sawnwood Consumption in Slovakia. BioResources 13, 3615-3626.
Parobek, J., Loučanová, E., Kalamárová, M., Šupín, M.; Repková Štofková, K. 2015. Customer window quadrant as a tool for tracking customer satisfaction on the furniture market. Procedia - economics and finance 34, 493-499.
Parobek, J., Paluš, H., Loučanová, E., Kalamárová, M., Glavonić, B. 2016. Competitiveness of central european countries in the EU forest products market with the emphasis on Slovakia. Acta Facultatis Xylologiae Zvolen 58,125-136.
Pätäri, S., Tuppura, A., Toppinen, A., Korhonen, J. 2016. Global sustainability megaforces in shaping the future of the European pulp and paper industry towards a bioeconomy. Forest Policy and Econics 66, 38-46.
Petruch, M., Walcher, W. 2021. Timber for future? Attitudes towards timber construction by young millennials in Austria - Marketing implications from a representative study, Journal of Cleaner Production 294, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126324
Rametsteiner, E. 1998. The Attitude of European Consumers Towards Forest and Forestry FAO, 1998. URL: http://www.fao.org/docrep/x0963e/x0963e0a.htm
Rodinný dom krok za krokom. 2022. Obľúbené zrubové domy: Aké typy existujú a koľko stoja? URL: https://rodinnydomkrokzakrokom.sk/oblubene-zrubove-domy-ake-typy-existuju-a-kolko-stoja/?backUrl=https://rodinnydomkrokzakrokom.sk/skola-stavania/?filter=2144-2248-2123-2264-1963-2125-2184-2156-2263-2131
Roos A., Woxblom, L., McCluskey, D. 2010. The influence of architects and structural engineers on timber in construction – perceptions and roles. Silva Fennica 44.
Seto, K.C., Guneralp, B., Hutyra, L.R. 2012. Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of United States of America 109, 16083-16088.
Sule, R. O. 1987. Modernisation in cities of Nigeria: A study of the recent thatched houses prohibition policy in Calabar (Cross River State). GeoJournal, 67-75.
Štefko, J., Bebej, D., Bednár, J. 2013. Envelope Structures of Low Energy Wooden Houses Considering Indoor Climate. Advanced Materials Research. Trans Tech Publications Ltd, 69-72.
Štěrbová, M., Loučanová, E., Paluš, H., Ivan, Ľ., Šálka, J. 2016. Innovation Strategy in Slovak Forest Contractor Firms A SWOT Analysis. Forests 7.
Strobel, K., Anders, N., Kristian. B. 2017. Interior wood use: Linking user perceptions to physical properties. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 32, 1-22.
Švajlenka, J., Kozlovská, M. 2018. Houses Based on Wood as an Ecological and Sustainable Housing Alternative—Case Study. Sustainability 10.
Toivonen, R. 2011. Dimensionality of quality from customer perspective in the wood industry. Dissertationes Forestales 114.
Toivonen, R. 2012. Product quality and value from consumer perspective—an application to wooden products. Journal of Forest Economics 18, 157-173.
Tomšik, R. 2017. Kvantitatívny výskum v pedagogických vedách. Úvod do metodológie a štatistického spracovania. PF UKF.
Toppinen, A., Juslin, H. 2014. Use of wood in green building: a study of expert perspectives from the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production 65, 350-361.
Toppinen, A., Toivonen, R., Valkeapää, A., RämӦ, A. 2013. Consumer perceptions on environmental and social responsibility of wood products in the Finnish markets. Scandivian Journal of Forest Research 28, 775-783.
Ullah, S., Tamaki, J. 2011. Analysis of Kano-model-based customer needs for product development. Systems Engineering 14, 154–172.
Weslager, C. A. 1969. The Log Cabin in America, New Brunswick, New Jersey, Rutgers University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The Journal publishes in an open access model. It provides immediate open access to its content under the Creative Commons BY 4.0 license. Authors who publish with this Journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned Creative Commons BY 4.0 license. See the Open Access License document.
