Abstract
The scaling up of zero energy (ZE) renovations contributes to the energy transition. Yet ZE renovations can be complex and error-prone in both process and outcome. This article draws on theory from sociotechnical design, participatory design, and inclusive design to analyse four recent case studies of ZE renovation/building in the Netherlands. The cases are studied using a mix of retrospective interviews and workshops, as well as ethnographic research. Three of the cases studied are ZE renovations of which two are recently completed and one is in progress, while the fourth case is a recently completed ZE new build. Three of the cases are social housing and one is mixed ownership. The research enquired into the situation of the project managers conducting the processes and also drew on resident experiences. The ZE renovation/builds are analysed as sociotechnical product-service systems (PSSs). The article evaluates how the use values, product values, and result values of these PSSs emerged from the processes. This perspective reveals issues with the usability of the PSSs, as well as with cost structures, technical tweaks, and maintenance agreements. Applying a design perspective provides starting points for co-learning strategies that could improve outcomes. Two example strategies that have potential in this regard are described, using demo dwellings and user manual as PSS prototypes in the early design phase. These and similar strategies could support the professionals in the field in creating successful ZE renovation/building processes.
Reference39 articles.
1. Baborska-Narożny, M., & Stevenson, F. (2019). Service controls interfaces in housing: Usability and engagement tool development. Building Research & Information, 47(3), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2018.1501535
2. Bervall-Kåreborn, B., & Ståhlbrost, A. (2008). Participatory design: One step back or two steps forward? In D. Hakken, J. Simonsen, & T. Robertson (Eds.), PDC ‘08: Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary Conference on Participatory Design 2008 (pp. 102–111). Association for Computing Machinery.
3. Bjögvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P. A. (2012). Design things and design thinking: Contemporary participatory design challenges. Design Issues, 28(3), 101–116.
4. Blomberg, D. J., & Karasti, H. (2012). Ethnography: Positioning ethnography within participatory design. In J. Simonsen & T. Robertson (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of participatory design (pp. 106–136). Routledge.
5. Boess, S., Silvester, S., de Wal, E., & de Wal, O. (2018). Acting from a participatory attitude in a networked collaboration. In L. Huybrechts, M. Teli, A. Light, Y. Lee, C. Di Salvo, E. Grönvall, A. M. Kanstrup, & K. Bødker (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Short papers, situated actions, workshops and tutorial (Vol. 2, pp. 1–6). Association for Computing Machinery.
Cited by
11 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