IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i3p631-d487457.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Transition of Dutch Social Housing Corporations to Sustainable Business Models for New Buildings and Retrofits

Author

Listed:
  • Wim Lambrechts

    (Faculty of Management, Open Universiteit, 6401 DL Heerlen, The Netherlands)

  • Andrew Mitchell

    (School of Engineering and Sustainable Development, De Montfort University, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK)

  • Mark Lemon

    (School of Engineering and Sustainable Development, De Montfort University, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK)

  • Muhammad Usman Mazhar

    (Department of Management, Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham NG1 4FQ, UK)

  • Ward Ooms

    (Faculty of Management, Open Universiteit, 6401 DL Heerlen, The Netherlands)

  • Rikkert van Heerde

    (Faculty of Management, Open Universiteit, 6401 DL Heerlen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Social housing corporations play an important role in society as they provide affordable and good-quality housing for vulnerable citizens. Yet, the sector has to deal with the historical legacy of a high number of old and poorly insulated buildings. While research into the processes that drive or hinder business model innovation in this sector is scarce, this paper draws upon multiple qualitative case studies of social housing in the Netherlands to identify critical success factors for the transition to sustainable business models for new buildings and retrofits. Results show that there are four key attributes for a successful transition process: collaboration (both with supply chain partners as well as other social housing associations); continuous innovation; vision; and the role of the government (including subsidies and fiscal regulations). While economic performance was an important boundary condition, sustainability was not always seen as a strategic organizational objective, a finding that might be explained through considering the legacy of social housing corporations. Furthermore, a number of barriers were identified including the need for customer acceptance, a lack of support from the construction sector and government and macroeconomic factors such as increased construction costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Wim Lambrechts & Andrew Mitchell & Mark Lemon & Muhammad Usman Mazhar & Ward Ooms & Rikkert van Heerde, 2021. "The Transition of Dutch Social Housing Corporations to Sustainable Business Models for New Buildings and Retrofits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:3:p:631-:d:487457
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/3/631/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/3/631/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Minttu Laukkanen & Samuli Patala, 2014. "Analysing Barriers To Sustainable Business Model Innovations: Innovation Systems Approach," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1-21.
    2. Scanlon, Kathleen & Fernández Arrigoitia, Melissa & Whitehead, Christine M E, 2015. "Social housing in Europe," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62938, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Beerepoot, Milou & Beerepoot, Niels, 2007. "Government regulation as an impetus for innovation: Evidence from energy performance regulation in the Dutch residential building sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 4812-4825, October.
    4. Kristina Mjörnell & Paula Femenías & Kerstin Annadotter, 2019. "Renovation Strategies for Multi-Residential Buildings from the Record Years in Sweden—Profit-Driven or Socioeconomically Responsible?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Filippidou, Faidra & Nieboer, Nico & Visscher, Henk, 2017. "Are we moving fast enough? The energy renovation rate of the Dutch non-profit housing using the national energy labelling database," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 488-498.
    6. Hoppe, Thomas, 2012. "Adoption of innovative energy systems in social housing: Lessons from eight large-scale renovation projects in The Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 791-801.
    7. Oriol Pons & Albert De la Fuente & Antonio Aguado, 2016. "The Use of MIVES as a Sustainability Assessment MCDM Method for Architecture and Civil Engineering Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-15, May.
    8. Mark Hall & David Purchase, 2006. "Building or bodging? Attitudes to sustainability in UK public sector housing construction development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 205-218.
    9. Faber, Albert & Hoppe, Thomas, 2013. "Co-constructing a sustainable built environment in the Netherlands—Dynamics and opportunities in an environmental sectoral innovation system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 628-638.
    10. Rodrigo Lozano, 2013. "Are Companies Planning their Organisational Changes for Corporate Sustainability? An Analysis of Three Case Studies on Resistance to Change and their Strategies to Overcome it," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 275-295, September.
    11. David Mullins & Vivienne Milligan & Nico Nieboer, 2018. "State directed hybridity? – the relationship between non-profit housing organizations and the state in three national contexts," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 565-588, May.
    12. Rupert J. Baumgartner, 2009. "Organizational culture and leadership: Preconditions for the development of a sustainable corporation," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(2), pages 102-113.
    13. Kelly Levin & Benjamin Cashore & Steven Bernstein & Graeme Auld, 2012. "Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(2), pages 123-152, June.
    14. Laura De Leeuw & Martijn Groenleer, 2018. "The Regional Governance of Energy-Neutral Housing: Toward a Framework for Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maria Conceição da Costa Silva & Alyx Diêgo Oliveira Silva & Emilia Rahnemay Kohlman Rabbani & Luciana H. Alencar & George da Mota Passos Neto & João Pedro Couto & Rodolfo Valdes-Vasquez, 2022. "Guidelines for the Implementation of BIM for Post-Occupancy Management of Social Housing in Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-20, September.
    2. Aleksandra Jadach-Sepioło & Katarzyna Olejniczak-Szuster & Michał Dziadkiewicz, 2021. "Does Environment Matter in Smart Revitalization Strategies? Management towards Sustainable Urban Regeneration Programs in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-16, July.
    3. Stella Boess, 2022. "Let’s Get Sociotechnical: A Design Perspective on Zero Energy Renovations," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 97-107.

    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. Aisma Linda Kiesnere & Rupert J. Baumgartner, 2019. "Sustainability Management in Practice: Organizational Change for Sustainability in Smaller Large-Sized Companies in Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-40, January.
    2. Vidushini Siva & Thomas Hoppe & Mansi Jain, 2017. "Green Buildings in Singapore; Analyzing a Frontrunner’s Sectoral Innovation System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Witjes, Sjors & Lozano, Rodrigo, 2016. "Towards a more Circular Economy: Proposing a framework linking sustainable public procurement and sustainable business models," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 37-44.
    4. Natacha Klein & Tomás B. Ramos & Pauline Deutz, 2022. "Factors and strategies for circularity implementation in the public sector: An organisational change management approach for sustainability," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 509-523, May.
    5. Margarida Rodrigues & Mário Franco, 2019. "The Corporate Sustainability Strategy in Organisations: A Systematic Review and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Witjes, Sjors & Vermeulen, Walter J.V. & Cramer, Jacqueline M., 2017. "Assessing Corporate Sustainability integration for corporate self-reflection," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 132-147.
    7. Sooksan Kantabutra, 2021. "Exploring Relationships among Sustainability Organizational Culture Components at a Leading Asian Industrial Conglomerate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-32, February.
    8. Aisma Linda Kiesnere & Rupert J. Baumgartner, 2019. "Sustainability management emergence and integration on different management levels in smaller large‐sized companies in Austria," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1607-1626, November.
    9. Thomas Hoppe & Gerdien De Vries, 2018. "Social Innovation and the Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Sooksan Kantabutra, 2022. "Toward a System Theory of Corporate Sustainability: An Interim Struggle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-27, November.
    11. Klein, Malte & Sauer, Andreas, 2016. "Celebrating 30 years of innovation system research: What you need to know about innovation systems," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 17-2016, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    12. Mechthild Donner & Anne Verniquet & Jan Broeze & Katrin Kayser & Hugo de Vries, 2021. "Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products," Post-Print hal-03004851, HAL.
    13. Constantinos A. Balaras & Andreas I. Theodoropoulos & Elena G. Dascalaki, 2023. "Geographic Information Systems for Facilitating Audits of the Urban Built Environment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-26, May.
    14. Natalie Slawinski & Jonatan Pinkse & Timo Busch & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjeed, 2014. "The role of short-termism and uncertainty in organizational inaction on climate change: multilevel framework," Working Papers hal-00961226, HAL.
    15. Idan Porat & Dalit Shach-Pinsly, 2021. "Building morphometric analysis as a tool for urban renewal: Identifying post-Second World War mass public housing development potential," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 48(2), pages 248-264, February.
    16. Nicola Andreij Rieg & Birgitta Gatersleben & Ian Christie, 2021. "Organizational Change Management for Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Quantitative Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, June.
    17. Guariso, Giorgio & Sangiorgio, Matteo, 2019. "Multi-objective planning of building stock renovation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 101-110.
    18. Bojana Suzić & Miroslav Karlíček & Václav Stříteský, 2016. "Adoption of Social Media for Public Relations by Museums," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(2), pages 5-16.
    19. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Balezentis, 2020. "Willingness to Pay for Renovation of Multi-Flat Buildings and to Share the Costs of Renovation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    20. Kai Greenlees & Randolph Cornelius, 2021. "The promise of panarchy in managed retreat: converging psychological perspectives and complex adaptive systems theory," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(3), pages 503-510, September.

    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:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:3:p:631-:d:487457. 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.