Living Buildings and the associated R&D based manufacturers; The Revolution towards Evolutionary Construction

misbe2011 Tracking Number 212

1. Abstract The construction industry is not sustainable. The statistics give a clear picture. Expressed in percentages of the totals in the Netherlands and when calculated over the total lifecycle, from the early start to the processing of waste after demolition, energy consumption is more than 50%, CO2 emission is more than 50%, waste production is 35 %, road transport is 25 %, failure costs is more than 15 %, average profits of construction companies are less than 2% of the turnover. The contribution of the construction industry to the GNP is 11%. The global figures will probably be worse as cooling requires disproportional more energy than heating. Practitioners and scientists all over the world agree that the construction industry with the associated structure and culture should be changed fundamentally. In this paper a great design of a sustainable construction industry is presented. Using ”attribute listing” as method, the contours of a future Construction Industry is described in 50 typical characteristics and attributes each of them in full contrast to the current situation. The result is remarkably close to the “normal” world and can be considered as Evolutionary Construction with Living Buildings. This is darwinism for construction industry. Sustainable buildings can only created by variation, selection and reproduction. Like car producers, building producers will develop new buildings from existing buildings. Each new or adapted building will contain the experience and knowledge accumulated during a long series of already realized buildings. As result, the value of buildings will be at least twice as much, the prices at least 50 % lower and the delivery time at least 50 % shorter. This seems to be a revolution but it is shown that a few early adopters have implemented already some parts of the defined changes. In this paper the basic principles and thoughts, which have been used for this design work, are presented. In 2012 a book will be published on Evolutionary Construction. 2. Introduction Practitioners and scientists all over the world agree that the construction industry shows systemic failings resulting in disappointing production, effectiveness and efficiency. The first movements aimed at substantial changes date from the early nineties of the last century and was initiated in the UK by the Latham commission (Latham,1994), followed by Rethinking Construction (Egan ,1998). After Australia and Finland also in Holland started an initiative after the big fraud affair (Tweede Kamer, 2002 and PSIB,2004). Measures were mainly aimed at change of the adversarial culture of the construction industry which manifest itself in lack of respect of its employees and uncapability of delivering for its custumers. During the last decades improvements were achieved by creating more openness, cooperation, trust, honesty, commitment and teamwork in projects (Egan,2002). In the late nineties of the last century, the notion of sustainability emerged in the world when facing the climate problems. Here, the construction sector plays a critical role, as its contribution is rather bad (Dubois &Gaddle,2002; Nam & Tatum, 1988). Expressed in percentages of the totals in the Netherlands the energy consumption during the utilization phase is 35 %, the CO2 emission during the utilization phase is also 35 %, the consumption of energy and the CO2 emission due to the production of materials is 35 %, the waste production is 35 %, road transport is 25 %, failure costs is more than 15 %, which is about 10 billion Euros per year. Moreover the average profits of construction companies are less than 2% of the turnover. These figures are rather bad when compared with the 11% contribution of the construction industry to the GNP (Lichtenberg, 2006). The global figures will probably be worse because cooling requires more energy than heating. The reason behind this bad performance is that every building is treated as a unique product. The world is covered with billions of unique buildings and unique structures. Each of them is not only the result of a unique project, but it is also developed by a unique combination of people, built under unique circumstances, delivered to a unique client, to be used by unique users, erected at a unique location, surrounded by a unique environment and constructed for a unique long lifetime. For each building the wheel is invented again and again (London & Kenley, 1999). For buildings as a whole neither learning curves, nor repetition effects can be observed throughout the supply chain (Vrijhoef & Koskela; Woudhuysen & Abley; Lansley,1994; Koskela,2003). In all, buildings and structures have an artisan character and show suboptimal performance). With the current credit crunch, the coming energy crisis and the booming construction activities in Asia, it is perhaps time for the international community in and around the construction industry to make a very fundamental change of the whole system with its associated cultural and structural aspects. In this paper a great design (a Big Picture) of a sustainable construction sector is presented. This big picture is created by a specific application of a simple design method that normally is used for innovation. 3. Methodology The method used in this paper is called ”Attribute Listing” and developed in design theory for innovation (Straker, 2003). Attribute listing, as used and adapted for this special purpose (the change of a complex and complicated system), contains 8 subsequent steps: Step 1: Take for granted that the construction industry is not a good system. Based on the figures as presented in the introduction, this starting point can easily be defended. Step 2: Make a list of typical characteristics and attributes associated with the present construction industry. This is rather difficult because this step requires a generalization of the construction industry. It is generally accepted that ”the construction industry” as a whole does not exist. Therefore this step is quite debatable and can only be based on general reports of governments (see paragraph 2). Nevertheless this step suffers to personal interpretation. Step 3: Provide each characteristic with theoretical and practical objections. These comments are essential for the directing the possible changes. These objections can be found in the general reports (see step1) Step 4: Develop, using the objections of step 3, an idea about a new system, that is not only understandable for everyone but also imaginable for everyone. Obviously the first idea used is the normal industrial market for consumer products. It fulfills the two requirements and it is far more sustainable than construction industry. A problem is that buildings should be tailor made and should also have a large lifetime. Therefore a second idea was added. That was the analogy of the termitarium. All information of the termitarium is contained in the combination building/builder. It is stored in the DNA of the termites. Each building is slightly different in shape but totally similar in structure. The structure is the most important factor, where the final shape depends on local environmental circumstances. It seems to be that termites have the disposal of build-in learning curves and build-in repetition effects. That is exactly what lacks in the construction industry. Step 5: Change the characteristics and attributes of the old system as much as possible towards associated characteristics and attributes of the newly to developed system. This is a difficult step because the construction industry has some specific characterics that are totally different frojm the normal consumer’s articles. For instance, buildings are fixed on the ground, have low value per kg material and a long lifetime. Step 6: Cluster the characteristics and attributes on mutual relations. The reason behind is that the relations imply a combined approach for change Step 7: Try to arrange the clusters of step 7 in a causal order. This is important because some changes have to be started first before other changes make a chance. Step 8: Provide the characteristics and attributes of the new system with individual examples that show those characteristics and attributes already or in a certain rate. This is an important step, because people only want to change a system when they clearly see not only advantages and benefits but also working examples (not presented in this paper). 4. The revolution in 50 issues and 8 clusters Cluster 1: The change in the organization of the competition Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 1.1 Owners specifies the building that he wants 1.1 Owner specifies the context in which the building should perform 1.2 Owner makes Term of Requirements for a building 1.2 Owner makes a set of wishes with respect to the desired building 1.3 Owner wants to have a pre-contractual design to be used as basis for a construction contract 1.3 Owner creates a solution space spanned by minimum requirements and boundary conditions 1.4 Price competition on fixed and specified demand 1.4 Competition on value price ratio, where value is perception of architecture, quantity and quality 1.5 Generation of additional work without generation of additional value 1.5 Generation of additional value without additional work. Cluster 2: The change in the Organization of the supply chain Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 2.1 Fragmented supply chain aimed at equalizing demand and supply 2.1 Integrated supply chain aimed at tuning demand and supply 2.2 Fragmented chain of advisors assisting the owner with the design of the building 2.2 Chain of advisors assisting the owner with specification of the solution space (context) 2.3 Owner adapts initial concept on basis of objections of stakeholders 2.3 Owner makes a choice out of different concepts based on participation of stakeholders 2.4 Top down design and engineering of new buildings 2.4 Bottom up development of new buildings 2.5 Design and engineering based on losse relations between fixed objects (interface management) 2.5 Development with fixed relations (structure) and variable objects 2.6 Project based fragmented supply chain with outsourcing 2.6 Company based integrated supply chain with collaboration and comakership 2.7 Design with yesterday’s technology, today’s ideas for tomorrow’s people 2.7 Development of buildings and structures that are adaptable for changing circumstances 2.8 Production on location with bring up of materials and elements 2.8 Production in factories and assembling on location with bring up of components and sub systems Cluster 3: Change in market approach Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 3.1 Owner looking for contractors 3.1 Producer looking for clients and consumers 3.2 Marketing contractors with profiling on segments and processes 3.2 Marketing Producers with profiling on trade marks and products 3.3 Reactive approach of contracters: make a drawing and we build it. 3.3 Active approach of producers: we have an excellent selection, take your pick 3.4 Don’t listen carefully to the owner, but act exactly what he wants 3.4 Listen carefully to the client but never deliver what he specifies 3.5 Unsolicited proposal as a contractor’s solution for an owners problem 3.5 A set of unsolicited proposals which can be combined to be a client’s solution for client’s problem 3.6 Implicit guarantee arrangements wrested by owners with delay of payments 3.6 Explicit guarantee arrangement offered by producers as additional value 3.7 Contract and delivery conditions imposed by owner 3.7 Contract and delivery conditions by producer 3.8 Owner thinks small in fragmented design work and acts big in integrated contracts 3.8 Owner thinks big in creating solution space (trust) and acts small by purchasing commodities Cluster 4: Change in characteristics of buildings and structures Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 4.1 Hand craft construction of unique client specific buildings 4.1 Industrial manufacturing of unique client specific buildings 4.2 Sub optimal buildings due to separation of design and construction 4.2 Optimal buildings due to R&D 4.3 Financial optimization over economical lifetime of buildings 4.3 Economic, social/cultural and ecologic optimization over technical lifetime of components and elements 4.4 Buildings as artefact and non adaptable monolith 4.4 Buildings as flexible, (de)mountable and adaptable systems 4.5 Mainly recycling, dumping and burning of waste materials 4.5 Mainly saving of materials and reuse of components and elements Cluster 5: Change in the accumulation of knowledge Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 5.1 Inventing the wheel again en again 5.1 Learning curves and repetition effects with industrial manufacturing 5.2 Contractors only capture implicit knowledge of their process 5.2 Producers capture explicit knowledge of product and process 5.3 Mainly pre-competitive knowledge available for all players 5.3 Mainly competitive knowledge 5.4 Building Information Modeling (BIM) aimed at project coordination and process coordination of supply chain 5.4 Parametric Knowledge Model (PKM) aimed at overall insight in behaviour of buildings and structures with respect to total lifecycle value and lifecycle cost 5.5 Design & Construct knowledge captured with a series of one shot realizations 5.5 Research and Development with respect to product families and product modules Cluster 6: Change in Quality control Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 6.1 Quality defined as the rate compliance is achieved with client’s specifications 6.1 Quality expressed in reliability, capacity, availability, maintainability, safety and operability 6.2 Client arranges project specific supervision 6.2 Producers arrange product certification by accredited third parties 6.3 Implicit Quality assurance by clusters ot tasks (integrated DBMO contracts with fragmented supply chains) 6.3 Explicit Quality assurance by specialized companies with integrated supply chains 6.4 Finance contract as implicit quality assurance 6.4 Long term product responsibility and liability with additional mid term guarantees 6.5 Verificatien and validation by both client and contractor. 6.5 Specific validation by Client, general validation and verification by Producer 6.6 Alliance contracts based on sharing risks 6.6 Alliance contracts based on sharing the added benefits Cluster 7: Change in Regulation Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 7.1 Use of resources and production of emissions are not taxable 7.1 Use of resources and production of emissions are taxable 7.2 Economical Most Advantageous Tender (EMAT) focused on process and control 7.2 Economical Most Advantageous Tender (EMAT) focused on total benefit of building or structure 7.3 Planning Procedures aimed at maintaining status quo with say of interested people 7.3 Planning Procedures aimed at change with active participation of stakeholders 7.4 Local system of licences for architecture and structural safety 7.4 Nation wide harmonization of license system with respect to architecture, structural safety, building physics and installations Cluster 8: Change of the sector Present situation construction industry Future situation construction industry 8.1 From a reactive culture towards a responsive culture (last two decades) 8.1 From a responsive culture towards a creative culture 8.2 No product innovation due to price competition on fixed specifications 8.2 Innovation as consequence of value/price competition. 8.3 Distrust due to shared responsibility for the building (specifications by client, compliance by contractor) 8.3 Trust due to separation of responsibilities (Client for context, Producer for product). 8.4 Large number of advisors and (sub) contractors) operate in between the consumers and producers of elements and components with proven technology 8.4 The client is the only player in between the consumers and producers. 8.5 Construction sector predominantly characterised by controlling project risks 8.5 Construction sector predominantly characterised by controlling company risks 8.6 One shot projects without standards on building level 8.6 The fight for setting the standards 8.7 Not sustainable with respect to People, Planet and Profit 8.7 Sustainable with respect to People Planet and Profit 5. Examples of early adopters The right columns in the tables of paragraph represent the Evolutionary Construction. It is a revolution indeed but it is a soft revolution. A minority of companies, clients, owners and scientists is busy to make steps in this direction. For big changes it is important to show that certain changes are possible by showing that some early adopters have dealt with it already. - Rijkswaterstaat organized in 1989 a value/ price competition for the Storm Surge Barrier Rotterdam (400 billion euro) and fulfilled points 1.1, 1.2,1.3,1.4. - Haasnoot Bridges (Haasnoot), De Meeuw Offices (Meeuw) and Burggraaff Housing (Burggraaff) produce products and fulfil the points 2.4,2.5,2.7, 2.8, 3.1,3.2,3.3,3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7,4.1, 4.2. 5. Conclusions When the construction industry is able to change itself in the description of the right sides of the columns, then producers and buildings together form living buildings. They belong to the set of living man-made systems. These buildings will be developed from a long series of already realized buildings. The buildings obey to Darwin’s principle of the survival of the fittest. Producers experiment with variations on existing buildings and select the best variations for multiplication. A crucial condition is that producers fill their Parametric Knowledge Models of their buildings with each delivery, inducing continuous improvement. Each building has more or less the same structure but the final form is totally different as result of the interaction with the environment. The buildings are flexible and adaptable, keeping them up to date en fit for changing purposes provided with state of the art technology. This is very important as the world inside and outside buildings changes faster then the buildings itself. Living buildings and structures are sustainable in any imaginable respect and at least doubles the lifecycle value, halves the lifecycle cost, doubles the profit of construction companies and halves the energy consumption and emissions. This will be achieved by increasing effectiveness by learning curves and increasing efficiency by repetitiveness. It is comparable with automotive and computer R&D. Each newly developed type contains all experience and knowledge of a long series of earlier types. 6. References Dubois, A. and Gadde, L.E. 2002 The construction industry as a loosely coupled system: implications for productivity and innovation Constrcution management and economics 20(7). Egan, J. (1998), Rethinking Construction: the report of the construction task force. Egan, J. (2002) Accelerating Change, Consulting Paper by Strategic Forum for Construction, London, HMSO. Koskela, L. (2003) Is structural change the primary solution to the problems of construction? in: Building Research and Information 31 (2). Lansley. P (1994) Analysing construction organizations. In: Construction Management and Economics 12 Latham, M, (1994) Constructing the Team, London. HSMO. Ligtenberg, (2006) Slimbouwen, a strategy for efficient and sustainable Building Innovation, in: Construction in the XXI Century: Local and Global challenges, Rome. London, K. and Kenley, R. (1999) Client’s role in construction supply chains: a theoretical discussion. In: Proceedings CIB Triennial World Symposium W92, Cape Town. Nam, C.H. and Tatum, C.B. (1988) Major characteristic of constructed products and resulting limitations of construction Technology Construction Management and Economics 6. PSIbouw (2004), Process and System Innovation in the Dutch Construction Industry, Project Plan for a Research and Development Programme, 2004. Tweede Kamer der Staten Generaal (2002) , Report Dutch Parliamentary Enquiry Commission, SDU. Vrijhoef, R. and Koskela, L.(2005) A critical review of construction as a project-based industry: identifying paths towards a project independent approach to construction in Kazi A.S.(ed) Proceedings CIB Combining Forces. Woudhuysen,J. & Abley,I. (2004) Why is construction so backward? Wiley, Chicester.