IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p11949-d921929.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

End-User Stakeholder Engagement in Refurbishment Design in Higher Education

Author

Listed:
  • Yuri Seki

    (Department of Construction Management, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia)

  • Ayokunle Olubunmi Olanipekun

    (School of Built Environment, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton WV1 1LY, UK)

  • Monty Sutrisna

    (School of Built Environment, Massey University, Auckland 0632, New Zealand)

Abstract

The refurbishment of building facilities needs to incorporate end-user engagement to ensure refurbished building facilities outcomes that include user-responsive learning spaces and satisfy users’ learning needs. However, existing refurbishment design process frameworks neglect to show the engagement process. A new framework for engaging end users in the refurbishment design of building facilities in higher education is presented. A qualitative research methodology was employed to obtain and analyse interview data from twenty-one design team stakeholders involved in two cases of refurbished building facilities in higher education institutions in Australia and New Zealand. The findings revealed four core themes which indicate the context and phases in the refurbishment design process where end-user engagement should be taken seriously. They are the higher education context, early design, user engagement in the design process and post-design phases. In addition, the findings revealed six specific strategies for end-user engagement in the refurbishment design of building facilities in higher education institutions. They are identifying stakeholder value systems, capturing end-user needs, communicating and integrating. Others are the setting of engagement boundaries and surveying of end users. This study modified the project heartbeat originally developed by Stanford University in 2010 for the refurbishment design process in a higher education context. The new framework bridges the gaps in the current literature between stakeholder theory and refurbishment design, and, by incorporating the refurbishment design processes, the framework can be employed in wider education and other project contexts to facilitate the balanced involvement of end users.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuri Seki & Ayokunle Olubunmi Olanipekun & Monty Sutrisna, 2022. "End-User Stakeholder Engagement in Refurbishment Design in Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:11949-:d:921929
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/11949/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/11949/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fang-Jye Shiue & Meng-Cong Zheng & Hsin-Yun Lee & Akhmad F.K. Khitam & Pei-Ying Li, 2019. "Renovation Construction Process Scheduling for Long-Term Performance of Buildings: An Application Case of University Campus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Xin Liang & Tao Yu & Li Guo, 2017. "Understanding Stakeholders’ Influence on Project Success with a New SNA Method: A Case Study of the Green Retrofit in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-19, October.
    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. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    2. Shu-Shun Liu & Muhammad Faizal Ardhiansyah Arifin, 2021. "Preventive Maintenance Model for National School Buildings in Indonesia Using a Constraint Programming Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Sharon Kwaramba & Stanley Murairwa, 2022. "Enhancing the quality of decisions by administrators: A framework for identifying, classifying and engaging primary school stakeholders in Harare, Zimbabwe," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 6(1), pages 46-56, January.
    4. Zhengqi He & Dechun Huang & Changzheng Zhang & Junmin Fang, 2018. "Toward a Stakeholder Perspective on Social Stability Risk of Large Hydraulic Engineering Projects in China: A Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    5. Zihan Zhang & Junkang Song & Wanjiang Wang, 2023. "Study on the Behavior Strategy of the Subject of Low-Carbon Retrofit of Residential Buildings Based on Tripartite Evolutionary Game," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-25, May.
    6. Yonggu Kim & Eul-Bum Lee, 2018. "A Probabilistic Alternative Approach to Optimal Project Profitability Based on the Value-at-Risk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-24, March.
    7. Ying Xie & Yisheng Liu, 2022. "Tripartite Evolutionary Game Analysis of Stakeholder Decision-Making Behavior in Energy-Efficient Retrofitting of Office Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Sadaf Alam & Miimu Airaksinen & Risto Lahdelma, 2021. "Attitudes and Approaches of Finnish Retrofit Industry Stakeholders toward Achieving Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-24, June.
    9. Theo Lynn & Pierangelo Rosati & Antonia Egli & Stelios Krinidis & Komninos Angelakoglou & Vasileios Sougkakis & Dimitrios Tzovaras & Mohamad Kassem & David Greenwood & Omar Doukari, 2021. "RINNO: Towards an Open Renovation Platform for Integrated Design and Delivery of Deep Renovation Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-21, May.
    10. Guorui Chen & Li Cheng & Foyuan Li, 2022. "Integrating Sustainability and Users’ Demands in the Retrofit of a University Campus in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    11. Zezhou Wu & Qiufeng He & Kaijie Yang & Jinming Zhang & Kexi Xu, 2020. "Investigating the Dynamics of China’s Green Building Policy Development from 1986 to 2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-19, December.
    12. Nadirah Hazwani Najib & Syuhaida Ismail & Rohayah Che Amat & Serdar Durdyev & Zdeňka Konečná & Abdoulmohammad Gholamzadeh Chofreh & Feybi Ariani Goni & Chitdrakantan Subramaniam & Jiří Jaromír Klemeš, 2022. "Stakeholders’ Impact Factors of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Sustainable Mixed Development Projects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    13. Fabian Dunke & Stefan Nickel, 2023. "A matheuristic for customized multi-level multi-criteria university timetabling," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 328(2), pages 1313-1348, September.
    14. Dar-Li Yang & Wen-Hung Kuo, 2019. "Minimizing Makespan in A Two-Machine Flowshop Problem with Processing Time Linearly Dependent on Job Waiting Time," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Dong Zheng & Hejun Xu & Shoaib Ali & Zhifu Jia & Xiaojun Ma, 2024. "Quadripartite Evolutionary Game of Incentives for Green Retrofitting of Historical Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-27, December.
    16. Liu, Guo & Li, Xiaohu & Tan, Yongtao & Zhang, Guomin, 2020. "Building green retrofit in China: Policies, barriers and recommendations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    17. Nair, Suja R., 2020. "The link between women entrepreneurship, innovation and stakeholder engagement: A review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 283-290.
    18. Beata Nowogońska & Magdalena Mielczarek, 2021. "Renovation Management Method in Neglected Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    19. Beata Nowogońska, 2020. "Consequences of Abandoning Renovation: Case Study—Neglected Industrial Heritage Building," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-14, August.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:11949-:d:921929. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.