IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i12p6593-d572007.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Main Design Considerations and Prospects of Contemporary Tall Timber Apartment Buildings: Views of Key Professionals from Finland

Author

Listed:
  • Markku Karjalainen

    (School of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, Tampere University, P.O. Box 600, FI-33014 Tampere, Finland)

  • Hüseyin Emre Ilgın

    (School of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, Tampere University, P.O. Box 600, FI-33014 Tampere, Finland)

  • Lassi Tulonen

    (School of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, Tampere University, P.O. Box 600, FI-33014 Tampere, Finland)

Abstract

As a result of increasing urbanization, the need for sustainable housing, e.g., tall (over eight-story) timber apartments, is increasing in Finland. Leveraging the experience of key Finnish professionals plays a significant role in the transition and expansion of sustainable timber housing as an essential part of the forest-based bioeconomy. This interview-based study will serve to fill a gap by examining the views of key professionals with experience in tall timber residential construction, using Finland as a case study. The 21 interviews primarily highlighted that: (1) the construction cost was the most important parameter affecting the architectural and structural design; (2) the most critical consideration influencing the overall design was reported to be the structural system selection and structural design, followed by city planning and client control; (3) key professionals assessed the building’s form and the main dimensions of the building’s mass as the most significant parameters affected by timber construction; (4) the main structural considerations that needed to be developed for tall timber housing were the bracing solutions and fittings, the structures of the intermediate floors, and load-bearing vertical/partition structures; (5) construction preconceptions, the lack of cost-competitiveness, and the lack of construction expertise/actors were considered to be major obstacles; (6) the most important parameters for the future of tall timber apartment buildings were reported to be education, timber construction marketing and public awareness, land delivery conditions, the unification of public administration, and financial support; (7) tall timber building design was reported to be a complex subject that requires close collaboration, especially between the architect, the structural designer and the wood supplier. This paper will help us to understand the boundary conditions affecting the design, the development needs in solutions, the importance of design parameters, the design parameters affected by timber construction, and the prospects, measures and obstacles to tall timber apartments from the perspectives of key Finnish professionals, thereby aiding the sound planning and development of tall timber housing projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Markku Karjalainen & Hüseyin Emre Ilgın & Lassi Tulonen, 2021. "Main Design Considerations and Prospects of Contemporary Tall Timber Apartment Buildings: Views of Key Professionals from Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6593-:d:572007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6593/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6593/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kerstin Hemström & Leif Gustavsson & Krushna Mahapatra, 2017. "The sociotechnical regime and Swedish contractor perceptions of structural frames," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 184-195, April.
    2. Rick Bosman & Jan Rotmans, 2016. "Transition Governance towards a Bioeconomy: A Comparison of Finland and The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(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. Roni Rinne & Hüseyin Emre Ilgın & Markku Karjalainen, 2022. "Comparative Study on Life-Cycle Assessment and Carbon Footprint of Hybrid, Concrete and Timber Apartment Buildings in Finland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Martyna Maniak-Huesser & Lars G. F. Tellnes & Edwin Zea Escamilla, 2021. "Mind the Gap: A Policy Gap Analysis of Programmes Promoting Timber Construction in Nordic Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    3. Rahman, Md. Rayhanur & Wallin, Ida & Toivonen, Ritva & Toppinen, Anne, 2024. "Local policy networks in support of wood-based construction: A case study from Joensuu, Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    4. Markku Karjalainen & Hüseyin Emre Ilgın & Lauri Metsäranta & Markku Norvasuo, 2021. "Residents’ Attitudes towards Wooden Facade Renovation and Additional Floor Construction in Finland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-17, November.

    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. Toivonen, Ritva & Vihemäki, Heini & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Policy narratives on wooden multi-storey construction and implications for technology innovation system governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    2. Fabio A. Madau & Brunella Arru & Roberto Furesi & Pietro Pulina, 2020. "Insect Farming for Feed and Food Production from a Circular Business Model Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Fu, Yang & Zhang, Xiaoling, 2018. "Two faces of an eco-city? Sustainability transition and territorial rescaling of a new town in Zhuhai," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 627-636.
    4. Ayrapetyan, David & Hermans, Frans, 2020. "Introducing a multiscalar framework for biocluster research: A meta-analysis," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(9).
    5. Marko Lovec & Luka Juvančič, 2021. "The Role of Industrial Revival in Untapping the Bioeconomy’s Potential in Central and Eastern Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    6. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.
    7. Lazarevic, David & Kautto, Petrus & Antikainen, Riina, 2020. "Finland's wood-frame multi-storey construction innovation system: Analysing motors of creative destruction," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    8. Alexandra Gottinger & Luana Ladu & Rainer Quitzow, 2020. "Studying the Transition towards a Circular Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Transition Studies and Existing Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    9. Sven Kevin van Langen & Renato Passaro, 2021. "The Dutch Green Deals Policy and Its Applicability to Circular Economy Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Alexandru Giurca & Liviu Nichiforel & Petru Tudor Stăncioiu & Marian Drăgoi & Daniel-Paul Dima, 2022. "Unlocking Romania’s Forest-Based Bioeconomy Potential: Knowledge-Action-Gaps and the Way Forward," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Seeram Ramakrishna & Muhammad Pervaiz & Jimi Tjong & Patrizia Ghisellini & Mohini M Sain, 2022. "Low-Carbon Materials: Genesis, Thoughts, Case Study, and Perspectives," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 649-664, June.
    12. Kumar, B. Ramesh & Mathimani, Thangavel & Sudhakar, M.P. & Rajendran, Karthik & Nizami, Abdul-Sattar & Brindhadevi, Kathirvel & Pugazhendhi, Arivalagan, 2021. "A state of the art review on the cultivation of algae for energy and other valuable products: Application, challenges, and opportunities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    13. Schäpke, Niko & Omann, Ines & Wittmayer, Julia & van Steenbergen, Frank & Mock, Mirijam, 2016. "Linking transitions and sustainability: A study into social effects of transition management," UFZ Discussion Papers 11/2016, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    14. Leire Barañano & Olatz Unamunzaga & Naroa Garbisu & Siebe Briers & Timokleia Orfanidou & Blasius Schmid & Inazio Martínez de Arano & Andrés Araujo & Carlos Garbisu, 2022. "Assessment of the Development of Forest-Based Bioeconomy in European Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-19, April.
    15. Darren Sharp & Robert Salter, 2017. "Direct Impacts of an Urban Living Lab from the Participants’ Perspective: Livewell Yarra," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, September.
    16. Wilde, Kerstin & Hermans, Frans, 2021. "Innovation in the bioeconomy: Perspectives of entrepreneurs on relevant framework conditions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 314.
    17. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    18. Viljanen, A. & Lähtinen, K. & Kanninen, V. & Toppinen, A., 2023. "A tale of five cities: The role of municipalities in the market diffusion of wooden residential multistory construction and retrofits," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. Niko Schäpke & Ines Omann & Julia M. Wittmayer & Frank Van Steenbergen & Mirijam Mock, 2017. "Linking Transitions to Sustainability: A Study of the Societal Effects of Transition Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-36, May.
    20. Durwin H.J. Lynch & Pim Klaassen & Lan van Wassenaer & Jacqueline E.W. Broerse, 2020. "Constructing the Public in Roadmapping the Transition to a Bioeconomy: A Case Study from the Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.

    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:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6593-:d:572007. 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.