Author:
Brinkø Rikke,Nielsen Susanne Balslev,van Meel Juriaan
Abstract
Purpose
– This paper aims to explore shared use of space and facilities as a concept, and present and illustrate the use of a typology to help classify and describe the different options for sharing space and facilities within buildings for optimised use of a building portfolio.
Design/methodology/approach
– The content presented is based on a cross-sectional study with an inductive approach. The results are based partly on secondary data in the form of a literature review and a mapping of 20 examples from Europe, USA and Australia, and partly on primary data from observations and interviews with key actors from two cases in Denmark and an illustration case from Ireland.
Findings
– The typology classifies and describes four archetypes of sharing between different people, building owners and organisations, to be used when discussing, planning, establishing and evaluating new and existing shared spaces.
Research limitations/implications
– The typology is the result of a first exploration of shared use of facilities and does not claim to be fully comprehensive or final.
Practical implications
– The typology is intended for both researchers and practitioners, and aims at increasing the understanding of sharing as a way to minimise the need for building new by better utilisation of the existing building stock.
Originality/value
– Shared space and facilities is a relatively new topic with not much research undertaken. This typology provides a language for discussing shared spaces and a base for further developing the research field.
Subject
Building and Construction,Architecture,Human Factors and Ergonomics
Reference32 articles.
1. Alexander, K.
(2009), “Community based facilities management”,
Property Management & Built Environment
, Vol. 24 Nos 7/8.
2. Alexander, K.
and
Brown, M.
(2006), “Community-based facilities management”,
Facilities
, Vol. 24 Nos 7/8, pp. 250-268, available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02632770610666116 (accessed 11 November 2012).
3. Allmendinger, P.
(2002), “Towards a post-positivist typology of planning theory”,
Planning Theory
, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 77-99.
4. Andersen, H.S.
(1985), “Danish low-rise housing co-operatives (bofællesskaber) as an example of a local community organization”,
Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research
, Vol. 2 No. 2.
5. Becker, F.D.
and
Steele, F.
(1995),
Workplace by Design: Mapping the High Performance Workscape
, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献