Unintended consequences: institutional artefacts, closure mechanisms and the performance gap

Abstract

Renewable technologies often feature in policies to improve the energy efficiency of buildings. Designers introduce predicted energy values for specific technologies, but are surprised when the technologies fail to perform as expected. Three building projects are used to explore the effect of construction processes on the energy performance of building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) technology. In two cases BIPV failed to deliver expected energy generation, while in the third, dramatic changes in project processes and technical specifications were needed to achieve the specified output. A social construction of technology (SCOT) analysis documents how the energy generation of BIPV disappeared from view at certain points as actors focused on building features. A contribution is made to the theoretical development of SCOT by responding to two issues: privileging of cognitive closure mechanisms and the neglect of institutional analysis. The concept of inflection mechanisms is introduced as a second type of closure mechanism. More specifically, the role of institutional artefacts (e.g. planning requirements and schedules) in the construction process is found to contribute to the performance gap. To reduce the 'performance gap', practitioners need to focus on the distribution of design responsibility, sequencing of work and the location of expertise.

Social construction of innovation and the role of innovation brokers in the construction sector

“…Decision-making was found to be affected by the alignment of technological and social frames being mobilised by actors at different times. Boyd and Schweber (2017) used SCOT analysis of documents to show how the energy generation of building-integrative photovoltaic (BIVP) technology disappeared from view at certain points as actors focused on building features. They contributed to the theoretical development of SCOT in two ways: privileging of cognitive closure mechanisms and the neglect of institutional analysis.…”

Navigating the logics of changing public facilities management

“…It has been recognized that PFMOs need to develop new kinds of (strategic) organizational capabilities (Junghans, 2013; Olsson et al , 2015; Ramskov-Galamba and Nielsen, 2016; Svensson, 2018; Jensen et al , 2018; Bröchner et al , 2019; Pardalis et al , 2019) to manage this growing number of challenges. However, little is known about how such work is conducted in practice and how PFMOs’ officials are conditioned by the specifics of the multiple logics milieu (Galamba et al , 2012; Hill et al , 2013; Boyd and Schweber, 2017; Campbell, 2017; Castán Broto, 2019).…”

A relational approach to understanding inhabitants’ engagement with Photovoltaic (PV) technology in homes

“…between design intentions and reality (Boyd and Schweber 2018). This is largely attributed to the general assumption that building use is independent of building energy efficiency, with a large emphasis placed on the physical and technical properties of new technologies compared to social aspects of inhabitants governing their energy efficiency in new homes, as a result (Galvin 2014).…”

“…Previous studies have examined the role of building actors in shaping inhabitants' engagement with their domestic technologies (Gram-Hanssen et al 2017, Wade, Murtagh, and Hitchings 2018, Frances and Stevenson 2018, and the role of the fragmented contractual arrangements and planning requirements in omitting the PV systems from the main design during the construction process (Boyd and Schweber 2018). Other studies have focused on the impact of the PV system in changing inhabitants' energy consumption practices (Haas et al 1999, Keirstead 2007; the possible ways that inhabitants can improve their use of PV energy (Luthander et al 2015, Jenny, Lo pez, andMosler 2006), and in relation to the introduction/ change of PV policies and incentives (Wittenberg, Blobaum, andMatthies 2018, Baborska-Narozny, Stevenson, andFrances 2016).…”