Search results

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

The purpose of this study is to understand what health and safety hazards low-income households are subject to by surveying the real conditions of the defective housing of low-income households, and to find improvement strategies. For this purpose, we visited the concentrated areas of the multi-dwelling unit (MDU) (also known as multi-family residential) housing in Jungwon-gu and Sujeong-gu in Seongnam City, Kyunggi-do, one of the representative areas in Korea with a massive distribution of the low-income class. Based on the survey data, the level of housing defects were comparison analyzed per income decile (decile 1, decile 2, deciles 3–4), and per housing location, in the categories of subsidence, cracks in the wall, delamination, water leakage/infiltration, condensation, and contamination. The housing condition per income class was more defective in the decile 2 households rather than in the decile 2 households, and in the substructure more than in the superstructure. Among the six defects, contamination problems, caused by sub-standard living conditions, were the most frequent cases. Structural defects, subsidence and cracks in the wall, were found in the main living areas—the bedrooms and the living rooms. It was confirmed in this study that the conditions of low-income housing are serious, and that it is necessary to explore specific countermeasures in the near future.

The Retrofit State of the Nation Survey has tracked the perceptions of social housing sector professionals’ views of retrofit since 2010. It has taken the form of three surveys conducted in 2010, 2013 and 2015. Here, the authors bring together the three surveys to specifically address the adoption and perceived effectiveness of retrofit technology in social housing projects. The purpose of this paper is to identify the changing perceptions of social housing professionals over a period of significant policy change within in the sector.

The research takes the form of a cross-sectional attitudinal, self-completion survey, covering sections considering the adoption levels and perceived effectiveness of different retrofit technologies. The target sample was medium to larger scale registered social housing providers. The surveys were conducted in 2010, 2013 and 2015.

In terms of effectiveness, the reliance on tried and tested technologies is apparent. Emerging or more complex technologies have declined in perceived effectiveness over the period. It is clear that social housing has adopted a wide range of technologies, and the larger providers, with whom this survey is undertaken, potentially represent a significant pool of UK retrofit experience.

The survey provides a record of the changing attitudes of social housing providers to specific technologies over the period of 2010-2015, which has seen significant changes in the energy and social housing policy. The findings show the link between policy instruments and adoption, with policy instruments mapping to adoption in the sector. Perceived effectiveness reflects a preference for more established technologies, an issue that is highlighted in the recent Bonfield Review.