Search results1 – 3 of 3
This study examines the issue of cross‐continental publishing in real estate research to understand the research interaction between the two major English‐speaking…
This study examines the issue of cross‐continental publishing in real estate research to understand the research interaction between the two major English‐speaking countries and to determine if a home bias exists. This study also determines the extent to which authors from other countries publish in US and UK journals, and provide a ranking of non‐US universities and authors. The survey of top US and UK real estate journals from 1993 through 1998 reveals that a home bias exists. The home bias concentration is higher in US journals than in UK journals, while UK journals exhibit more balanced origins, emanating not only from the USA/Canada, but also from Australia, New Zealand and Asia. In addition, the study reveals that the Universities of Reading, Ulster and Glasgow are well placed among European universities, while the National University of Singapore ranks well in Asia. Top US researchers tend to publish exclusively in US journals; likewise the same is observed for UK researchers. However, some notable exceptions are observed. Finally, a possible reason for the home bias could be the different research approaches undertaken by US and UK journals.
The purpose of this paper is to explore perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of green roofs for commercial real estate building owners/occupiers in a UK city…
The purpose of this paper is to explore perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of green roofs for commercial real estate building owners/occupiers in a UK city and consider how these might affect the chances of their adoption.
Two sets of semi-structured interviews were conducted with purposively selected respondents, 10 with and 25 without green roofs, to compare and contrast differing perspectives. A grounded theory approach was taken to data analysis, allowing themes to emerge directly from the data.
Low awareness and understanding were observed amongst those without green roofs, which positively affected perceived costs whilst negatively affecting perceived benefits. Green roof owners gave weight to wider societal and ecosystem services benefits, whilst those without focussed much more upon building-level benefits and costs.
Because of the restricted sample size, the findings in themselves are not generalizable; rather, themes are drawn from the research for reflection.
Findings point to steps that might be required of regional and national government to increase green roof uptake. This could involve initiating conversations to raise awareness, shift discourse and perceived norms and best practice; offering incentives, education and training; and presenting high-profile exemplar projects of green roofing to begin to mainstream the technology and get it onto the radar of building owners.
Bringing together social research around cohorts with and without green roofs, the paper throws into sharp relief discussions around costs and benefits and points towards potentially more productive directions for action to encourage consideration and take-up of green roofs by building owners.