IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00743393.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation In Sustainable Construction: Eco-Cities And Social Housing In France And Denmark

Author

Listed:
  • Eva Boxenbaum

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Susse Georg

    (Department of Development and Planning - AAU - Aalborg University [Denmark])

  • Gabriela Garza de Linde

    (Department of Organization - CBS - Copenhagen Business School [Copenhagen])

  • Satu Reijonen

    (Department of Organization - CBS - Copenhagen Business School [Copenhagen])

  • Franck Aggeri

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Aurélien Acquier

    (ESCP-EAP - ESCP-EAP - Ecole Supérieure de Commerce de Paris)

  • Rebecca Pinheiro-Croisel

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Mathias Béjean

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

The construction sector is often characterized as a reactive sector, as lagging behind other sectors of the economy, notably industry, when it comes to innovation; as mechanically responding to external (client) needs and implementing innovations that originate elsewhere (Winch 1998, Harty 2008). The sector is often presented as un-dynamic and un-innovative and as precluding novel design practices and tools, an orientation that seems to flow from its rigid routines, professional boundaries, division of labor, national legislation, established performance measures, and fixed ideas about best practices. Accordingly, building projects in the construction sector tend to reflect objectives and institutionalized practices other than those related to innovation and sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva Boxenbaum & Susse Georg & Gabriela Garza de Linde & Satu Reijonen & Franck Aggeri & Aurélien Acquier & Rebecca Pinheiro-Croisel & Mathias Béjean, 2010. "Innovation In Sustainable Construction: Eco-Cities And Social Housing In France And Denmark," Post-Print halshs-00743393, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00743393
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00743393
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00743393/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garud, Raghu & Karnoe, Peter, 2003. "Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 277-300, February.
    2. Chris Harty, 2008. "Implementing innovation in construction: contexts, relative boundedness and actor-network theory," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(10), pages 1029-1041.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eva Boxenbaum & Aurélien Acquier & Rebecca Pinheiro-Croisel & Gabriela Garza de Linde, 2011. "Processes Of Institutional Innovation: Reference Tools For Eco-Cities In France And Denmark," Post-Print halshs-00743372, HAL.
    2. Kjell Tryggestad, 2012. "Perspectives on Projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 416-420, February.
    3. David Vallat, 2015. "Une alternative au dualisme État-Marché : l’économie collaborative, questions pratiques et épistémologiques," Working Papers halshs-01249308, HAL.
    4. Baier-Fuentes, Hugo & Andrade-Valbuena, Nelson A. & Huertas Gonzalez-Serrano, Maria & Gaviria-Marin, Magaly, 2023. "Bricolage as an effective tool for the survival of owner-managed SMEs during crises," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. Lai, Kuei-Kuei & Chen, Yu-Long & Kumar, Vimal & Daim, Tugrul & Verma, Pratima & Kao, Fang-Chen & Liu, Ruirong, 2023. "Mapping technological trajectories and exploring knowledge sources: A case study of E-payment technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    6. Pandza, Krsto & Ellwood, Paul, 2013. "Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1112-1125.
    7. Mario Pansera & Fabien Martinez, 2017. "Innovation for development and poverty reduction: an integrative literature review," Post-Print hal-02887777, HAL.
    8. Wirth, Steffen, 2014. "Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 236-246.
    9. Andrews, Matt & Pritchett, Lant & Woolcock, Michael, 2013. "Escaping Capability Traps Through Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA)," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 234-244.
    10. Harborne, Paul & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Pathways to commercial wind power in the US, Europe and Japan: The role of demonstration projects and field trials in the innovation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3580-3595, September.
    11. Markku Sotarauta & Nina Mustikkamäki, 2015. "Institutional Entrepreneurship, Power, and Knowledge in Innovation Systems: Institutionalization of Regenerative Medicine in Tampere, Finland," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(2), pages 342-357, April.
    12. Simon Baumgartinger-Seiringer & David Doloreux & Richard Shearmur & Michaela Trippl, 2021. "When history does not matter? The rise of Quebec’s wine industry," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_05, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    13. Pavlos Kilintzis & Giorgos Avlogiaris & Elpida Samara & Yiannis Bakouros, 2023. "Technology Entrepreneurship: a Model for the European Case," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 879-904, June.
    14. Yu-Chieh Lo, Jade, 2015. "Selling science: Resource mobilization strategies in the emerging field of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1513-1526.
    15. Witell, Lars & Gebauer, Heiko & Jaakkola, Elina & Hammedi, Wafa & Patricio, Lia & Perks, Helen, 2017. "A bricolage perspective on service innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 290-298.
    16. Linda Edelman & Helena Yli–Renko, 2010. "The Impact of Environment and Entrepreneurial Perceptions on Venture-Creation Efforts: Bridging the Discovery and Creation Views of Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(5), pages 833-856, September.
    17. Binz, Christian & Gosens, Jorrit & Hansen, Teis & Hansen, Ulrich Elmer, 2017. "Toward Technology-Sensitive Catching-Up Policies: Insights from Renewable Energy in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 418-437.
    18. John R. Bryson & Lauren Andres & Andrew Davies, 2020. "COVID‐19, Virtual Church Services and a New Temporary Geography of Home," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 111(3), pages 360-372, July.
    19. Steffen Korsgaard, 2011. "Opportunity formation in social entrepreneurship," Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 265-285, September.
    20. Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Söderholm, Patrik & Ylinenpää, Håkan, 2016. "The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1743-1761.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00743393. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.