Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI, November, 2010

INNOVATIVE BUILDING SYSTEMS FOR SUSTAINABLE MODERN BUILDING

CONSTRUCTION: RELEVANCE, IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES OF THE
LIFESPAN BUILDING CONCEPT IN GHANA

S. Agyefi-Mensah1, E. Zoya Kpamma2

ABSTRACT

Since the Earth Summit in 1992, in Rio, which developed Agenda 21 as the international
blueprint for sustainable development, society has been favourably disposed to a progressive
commitment to pursue sustainability. The focus has been on the creation of sustainable human
settlement particularly in urban environments through the adoption of new and innovative design
concepts and construction technologies. This involves the adoption of systems of building which
contribute to efficient use of energy and resources. Among the new and innovative ideas is the
lifespan building concept. In this paper, we present a review of the concept and highlight its
rationale for meeting the requirements of modern buildings while meeting the expected
sustainability. Based on expected lifespan, the paper discusses the implications for design
philosophy, material specification, selection and utilization of construction technology, as well as
the possible challenges to effective utilization and successful adoption within the Ghanaian
economic, social and environmental contexts.

Keywords: Adaptability, building, lifespan, sustainable development, urban.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The idea of modernization connotes a dynamic change in response to new trends and demands,
styles, tastes and preferences, attitudes, practices and standards. In the arts, the term is used to
describe revolutionary ideas and styles in architecture, literature, etc. modernization also
involves the quest for new ways of working and living, including learning and leisure. Thus the

1
Lecturer, Department of Building Technology, Cape Coast Polytechnic, Cape Coast, Ghana,
sagyefimensah@yahoo.com
2
Lecturer, Department of Building Technology, Sunyani Polytechnic, Sunyani, Ghana,
evanskpamma@yahoo.co.uk
Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

concept of modernization permeates nearly every aspects of human life – physical, socio-
economic, political, etc.

Several interacting and mutually reinforcing factors can be cited to contribute to the phenomenon
of modernization. For sociologists, for example, it reflects the result of increasing
transformations regarding the structure and function of society, a process driven by changing
patterns of individual and collective actions, attitudes and assumptions (Gelle and Levine, 1999).
This is referred to as social change. Cultural change dictates not only the size of families, for
example, but individual and collective needs and aspirations while urbanization redefines the
requirements for urban space and physical infrastructure. To ecologists and environmental
scientists, it may better be understood as the effects of climate change – increasing variations in
the general climatic conditions of the world, with probabilities of extreme future conditions
including global warming.

The significance of these changes to the built environment sector lies in the fact that people (and
the societies which shape them), climate (the environmental context in which people live) and
architecture (building design, structure and fabric) are inextricably linked. As societies change,
the needs (present) and aspirations (future possibilities) of people in respect of buildings change
and consequently change the make of their buildings. Besides as climate changes, people
necessarily must control buildings to suit themselves by various means. Buildings ameliorate
climate within traditionally occupied settlements to suit occupants and provide comfort within
cultural norms (Roaf et al., 2005). All these have implication for energy use, whether in the
make of materials for building or in keeping buildings habitable. It therefore stands to reason that
since buildings can themselves not change, they must be made in ways that allow for adaptability
for changing needs and aspirations.

Consequently, it is now widely recognized that there is the need to rethink the way we build.
There is the need to develop or else seek new and innovative technologies (UNCED, 1992) in the
form of new design concepts, construction techniques, and improved materials etc. It also means
that there is the need for an approach to building that meets present needs and reduces impacts
on future generations by integrating building materials and methods that promote environmental
quality, economic vitality, and social benefit through the design, construction and operation of

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

the built environment (UNEP, 2001). The adopted process and product technologies must thus be
sustainable.

2.0 CHANGING BUILDING USE PATTERN: A GROWING CHALLENGE IN THE

BUILDING SECTOR
Buildings constitute a very integral part of the infrastructure of every productive society. They
provide the environment necessary for a healthy, comfortable, secure and productive life. By
their forward and backward linkages, buildings also stimulate a spin-off of development in other
sectors of the economy such as health, education, business and commerce.

Generally, buildings are designed and constructed for specific purposes based on the particular
needs and aspirations of users or the requirements of clients. The fundamental use or purpose for
which a building is constructed defines its function. By function, buildings may be classified as
being residential (such as low and high-rise apartments, built as shelter and living space);
commercial (such as hotels, department stores, retail shops and offices for business); industrial
(buildings such as factories, workshops and warehouses for the manufacture and storage of
goods) and institutional buildings (such as schools, libraries, governmental offices, research
laboratories and hospitals constructed to provide specific social services such as education,
health care, institutional governance and public administration). Buildings may also serve
religious and recreational purposes such as churches, amphitheatres, museums etc.

These defined functions however change over time. For example, a warehouse could find use as
a library block, or a house as an office complex. Kincaid (2002) refers to this as the origin and
destination uses of buildings being a function of the needs and aspirations of users at a time. For
corporate organizations, Kincaid (2002) explain that changes in the use pattern of buildings are
driven by several factors including the impact of information technology, global competition and
environmental concerns, new organizational structures, flexible employment arrangements,
novel working practices, etc.

The pace of IT development is resulting in profound adjustment to the demand and use of spaces
like offices space and shops, as well as in the criteria for residential location. Russell and Moffatt
(2001) predict undoubtedly very significant changes in telecommunication and computing
Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

technologies in the 21st century with consequent changes in the requirements for building space.
In addition, organizations are increasingly becoming more flexible in their requirements for
usable space, thus seeking shorter leases, with distributed operations to meet contemporary
demands and convenience of customers, subcontractors and staff (Kincaid, 2002). Besides,
flexible employment strategies including flexible working hours, part-time working and job-
sharing schemes, along with growth in outsourcing in both the private and public sector are fast
emerging (Handy, 1991). Becker et al. (1991) also reported on changing working practices that
lead to less space per employee through space sharing, increasing degrees of home working,
electronic filing and improved space utilization. Moreover, there are changing regulatory
requirements in response to environmental health and public safety with consequent changing
demands on living and working space. Furthermore, user expectations regarding human health
and well-being in workplace in addition to energy efficiency of buildings is fast changing, giving
rise to increasing desire for more natural environment (Kincaid, 2002).

These rapid changes could produce challenges in building supply. In many advanced countries
such as the U.K, this takes the form of high levels of long-term vacancy and under-utilization of
certain building stock particularly offices. It has also led to redundancy as well as premature
obsolescence in commercial buildings generally, driven by functional and locational factors
rather than by age, physical deterioration and depreciation (ibid). The situation contributes to
artificial shortage and hence under- provision in certain key building sectors such as the rented
housing market, reductions in the economic value of building stocks and significant dereliction
in inner cities, resulting in unsustainable urban environment.

The significance of this challenge is that there is a situation whereby buildings diminish in utility
with corresponding loss in economic value. The buildings then eventually become redundant and
obsolete even though they still remain technically (in terms of stability, durability, etc) sound. A
situation then arises whereby buildings must be prematurely demolished and disposed as scrap to
fill the waste bin. This is not uncommon in many urban settlements in the world including
Ghana. Besides the loss of return on investment, the impact on environmental sustainability in
terms of resource consumption and waste generation, can be enormous. It becomes necessary to
therefore find what accounts for the deficiency.

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

According to Post (2002) the problem stems from the traditional view of building for posterity,
where buildings are designed with an apparently ‘endless’ physical or technical lifespan. This
puts some degree of physical restraints over the use and performance of the building imposed by
spatial form, servicing regimes, and material specifications used. The assumption therefore is
that for greater usefulness of buildings over its lifetime and the attainment of sustainability,
buildings must be designed for predetermined lifespans based on their function. In other words,
buildings must be designed for a (relatively short) lifespan, based on their primary intended use,
employing well-considered techniques and materials. Indeed why design buildings for an
‘endless’ life if it would be useful for only a certain defined length of time? What we demand
from our homes, for example, today is very different from fifty year ago.

Alternatively, a design approach whereby the frame of the building is designed for a relatively
long lifespan with flexible and adaptable finishing such that part of the building can be replaced
or modified independent of other parts (‘loose-fit’), could be explored (Post, 2002). This latter
view, for example, is consistent with the work of Kincaid (2002) on adaptive reuse of buildings,
which proposes designs which assure full adaptability to new uses in response to changing
social, technological, economic, and environment changes.

3.0 A REVIEW OF THE LIFESPAN BUILDING CONCEPTS

3.1 The Conceptual Idea
The Lifespan Building Concept is a new and radical approach for achieving improved
performance and greater sustainability in building construction. It seeks to deal with the gap in
the lifespan of buildings by adjusting, through design and construction, the relatively short
economic (functional) life of buildings and its apparent ‘endless’ technical or physical life. It is
the design of buildings with a relatively short lifespan predetermined by their function, and a
well tailored use of techniques and materials, with minimal impact on the environment (Post,
2002). Thus, by considering the functional life of buildings, the concept makes the technical life
of the building equal to its economic (useful) life.

The research explores the possibility of achieving sustainable human settlements through the
creation of an environmental or building structure which after its functional lifetime, can be
completely dismantled in components, recycled, reused or regenerated, leaving no trace on the
 Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

site where it was once built. Thus, it contributes to ensuring harmony between the natural and
built environment. It is thus a “cradle to cradle” innovation in building technology.

3.2 Case Study Application

The Lifespan Building concept has been applied in the realization of two building projects in the
Netherlands, namely the XX-Office and the Children’s Art Gallery in Rotterdam. Both projects
assume and use a predetermined economic and technical life of 20 years (Figure 1). Thus, it is
anticipated that after this defined life, the entire building will be completely dismantled in
components, recycled, reused or regenerated, leaving no trace on the site where it was once built.
For example, the ventilation ducts are made of cardboard which is biodegradable after twenty
years unlike galvanized steel that is normally used. The floors are also made out of thin layers of
wood with sand infill. Thus, after 20 years you can simply tip out the sand and possibly reuse the
wood. Project XX is therefore a building consisting primarily of wood, glass, sand and
cardboard.

Quality of building performance

Performance
100%
Performance level

t=0 t = 20 year
Life of Building

Figure 1: The ideal course of the quality performance of a building with a

predetermined lifespan (Post and Willems, 2002)
lifespan of 20 years (XX-way building). Post and Willem (2001)
Assessment of key environmental variables such as energy consumption, emissions, use of
resources, and waste generation using Eco-Quantum analysis tool shows that overall, the XX-
way of building saves 45% on resource depletion (Post and Willems, 2001). Thus it creates less
environmental load at the end of its life since the materials are recyclable or biodegradable.

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

3.3 The ‘Loose fit’ Building Concept

Also related to the idea of the Lifespan Building Concept is the ‘loose fit’ approach. Gregory
(2005), use the term Multispace to describe the concept. It follows the simple philosophy of
designing a building for adaptation to multiple uses over its lifetime. It is a combination of
lifecycle related and durable building in which the main carrying construction is designed for a
relatively long lifespan and the finishing is light, replaceable, flexible and adaptable (Post, 2002).
Accordingly, the building design assures the possibility of adapting the building for other uses
through its geometry, fabric and structure without the need to reinvent its essential morphology
(Kincaid, 2002). This is exemplified in the works of Duffy (1990) and Brand (1994). Their
works put forward key principles of building adaptations with rules about lifespan of the
different parts of the building. In their view, for example, the structural ‘skeleton’ assumes an
‘endless’ lifespan while installations, interior and facades are changed over time at different
intervals.

The ‘loose fit’ approach is demonstrated as being advantageous in allowing a level of

adaptability. Adaptable space allows landlords to be able to alter the mix of building use to
respond to market conditions without altering the shell construction. This maximizes the return at
all times and minimizes construction cost and time (Davision et al., 2006). It also offers the
potential for developers to maximize commercial returns and reduce risk associated with mixed
use schemes without having to predetermine which part of the scheme performs a particular use
(ibid). This ensures value for investment. And in terms of environmental impact, it is estimated
that the Multispace (‘loose fit’) building concept ensures a 15% reduction in (a) air emissions
and b) demolition solid waste (Davison et al., 2006).

STUFF

SPACEPLAN

SERVICES
SKIN
STRUCTURE

SITE

Figure 2: Six layers of Change (Brand, 1994)

Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

3.4 Applications of the ‘Loose fit’ Concept

The ‘loose fit’ building concept has been used to develop prototype buildings both in the
Netherlands, U.K, and Switzerland. The features of the Multispace architecture have been
incorporated into a ‘Customised Office Solution’ (Laing O’Rourke, 2005; cited in Davison et al.,
2006). In the Netherlands, it has been applied to the construction of an elderly Care Centre in
Roosendaal, a 35,000 m2 complex with building parts of different lifespans varying from 10 to 50
(Post and Willem, 2001). Another interesting example is the INO hospital in Bern, Switzerland.
In the INO-project three systems are distinguished and have been developed separately as
follows:
• Primary system: structure + outer layer (approximate lifespan of 100 years)
• Secondary system: infill (20 years)
• Tertiary system: interior (5-10 years).

3.5 The Relevance of Concepts to Building Construction a Developing Country like

Ghana
For a typical developing country like Ghana, the relevance of these concepts lies in the fact that
they can contribute to achieving improved and sustainable building performance. They assure the
following benefits:
i. Judicious use of urban space in response to increasing urbanization and the effects of
social change.
ii. Create user-friendly and functionally responsive buildings
iii. Maximizes the returns on investments in buildings as a capital asset
iv. Save on scarce building resources and hence offer the potential to create affordable
buildings
v. Reduce significantly the volume of waste generated and sent to the waste stream
vi. Reduce the impact of the building construction on environmental quality by minimizing
atmospheric emissions such as CO2 and other GHGs

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

4.0 THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE CONCEPTS FOR BUILDING TECHNOLOGY

Innovations and new technologies present a case for change, not only in terms of materials and
methods, but also industry practices. Beyond human experience, research evidence attests to the
fact that where change has been restrained when needed, new technologies, however useful, have
failed to achieve their desired impact. The Dymaxion house innovation account by Taylor and
Levitt (2004) is a case in point.

In 1927, R. Buckminster Fuller invented the Dymaxion house to solve the perceived need for
mass-produced, affordable, and environmentally friendly house. The innovation was designed to
meet the need of “two billion new homes that will be required by humanity in the next eighty
years” (Fuller, 1928; cited in Taylor and Levitt, 2004). The Dymaxion house, whose name was
the acronym for Dynamic, Maximum and Tension, used a tension suspension system from a
central column to support an aluminium external structure. This design was considered as a
significant departure from existing building practices in the industry. It required a change in
building materials for some parts of the building, especially the exterior wall. But, even more
importantly, it required a change in the building process for many of the trade contractors.
Nearly eighty years later, Fuller’s innovation for the industry has yet to be realized. It was not
until 1945 that the first Dymaxion house was built in Witchita, Kansas for Beech Airfport. The
failure has been attributed to the inability of building contractors to efficiently manage the
building process, the constraints of building regulations as well a lack of preparedness on the part
of d subcontractors namely the electrical and plumbing, to change their business practices in
response to the demands of the new technology (Fuller, 1983).

The case presented above shows that new and innovative building technologies, however useful,
require for their successful application, actors within a particular technological area to develop
qualitatively new technological capabilities. This may involve a change in the approach to
design, material specification and utilization, techniques for construction, management of the
building process as well as legislative standards such as building regulations and codes of
practice. ‘New wine, indeed require new wineskins’!

4.1 Buildability and Demountability

Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

Implicit in the above concepts is the need for designs not only to be reasonably buildable but that
they must also lend themselves to easy disassembly or deconstruction without any significant
levels of waste generation. Thus, designs must first facilitate ease of onsite assembly and yet
offer possibilities for components to be demounted or dismantled when required. This requires
simplicity of design, standardization of components, in addition to very clear and thorough
communication of design intent. Studies show that this can be achieved through greater
integration of the design approach such that both designers and builders are able to see the whole
building process through the eyes of each other (Adams, 1989). It also has implication for the
procurement route adopted on building project. For ease of deconstruction these concepts
suggest a shift from the current monolithic nature of building construction to prefabrication of
components.

4.2 Design Approach

Fundamental to the above implication is the need for modularity in design which thrives on
dimensional or modular coordination. This is a system of building construction in which building
units follow a basic unit of measure that can be re-arranged, replaced or interchanged with ease.
Components follow a standard basic size called the module. Significantly, this means the
structural and sectional grid of the building ideally coordinate so that they are fully
interchangeable, without the need for significant transfer of structures or uneconomically long
spans. The morphology and dimensions of the building, its floor plate, structural grid, floor to
floor height and fenestration modules must be suitable to support new uses. This also means that
the overall flexibility of the design of building space must be sufficient to allow for replanning
and redesign for new uses.

4.3 Material Specifications

Another critical implication relates to the materials used for construction. They must be
appropriate for adaptation to new uses. In the case of the XX-Projects for example, materials
specified and used are required to have the capacity to be restored into their natural state after 20
years or recycled completely (i.e. divided into homogenous natural/non-natural resources). It
should also be possible for parts or components of the building, after 20 years, to be utilized
again for other applications. On one hand, this means that the use of renewable materials like

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

timber and bamboo deserves greater attention in preference to non-renewable materials like steel.
To meet the requirements of demountability, materials light in weight like plastics and
plasterboards should be used for construction.

4.4 Challenges of the Lifespan Building Concepts within the Context of the Developing
World
Developed and developing countries alike face common challenges like the negative effects of
globalization and climate change, for example. However, the differences in scope in addition to
the significant variations in resources capacity to deal with them are extremely wide. Prominent
among these challenges in respect of utilization of the new systems is the level of
industrialization to support prefabrication of components. Some of the challenges may also relate
to physical environmental differences such as climatic conditions. For example a focus on the
thermal properties of materials to ensure indoor comfort within a hot climate may lead to a
preference for dense materials rather light weight materials in wall and roof construction. It is
therefore important, for effective utilization of these new concepts, to carefully analyze and
address these concerns.

i) Variations in Climatic Conditions

A symbiotic relation exist not only between man and his ecosystem (and climate for that matter),
but also buildings and climate. According to Roaf et al. (2005), the degree to which any
population will be exposed to the exigencies of climate is related to their geographical location in
relation to latitudes, land masses and patterns of climate change. Thus, because climate varies
from global through regional to local situations, and affects choice of materials directly, it
becomes an important consideration for the new concept.

In hot tropical climates like Ghana, the building envelope serves to moderate the daytime heating
effect of the external air and solar radiation on the structure and it’s interior. At the same time the
drastic lowering of temperature during the night should be moderated internally without the use
of mechanical cooling devices. Materials and components selected should therefore
characteristically be of high thermal capacity but low thermal conductivity. In the same light,
Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

materials such as glass and steel with their high thermal transmittance and low thermal resistance
may be less appropriate.

ii) Technological Capacity

Another challenge which requires attention is the level of technology capacity in developing
countries. Technological capacity is used here to refer to all the skills and organization-specific
technological assets such as production techniques available to the building industry required to
master the new technology, adapt it to local conditions, improve it and ultimately use it as a base
to create new technologies. For example, modularity in construction requires full rationalization,
mechanization and other sophisticated technologies not only for factory manufacture of materials
and components but also on-site assembly. There is also the challenge of human capacity in
terms of the depth, relevance and quality of knowledge of skilled manpower required to apply
the technologies in both quantitative and qualitative terms.
In this regard, Drewer (1980), observes that many of the construction projects which developing
countries require for their socio-economic development are beyond the capabilities of their
industries to undertake due to size, novelty and complexity. It is therefore important to take into
consideration the technology capacity of the adopting nation.

iii) Institutional Framework

Institutions are simply rules which structure the actions of and interactions between actors
(Wiemer et al, 1995). They refer in this context to formal and explicit rules in the form of
building regulations, standards and codes of practice. These provide guidance to designers and
builders based on best practices and research. Oster et al. (1977), found that building codes and
regulations for example, can slow the diffusion rate for an innovation. In the case of the
Dymaxion house innovation Fuller (1983) observed that one of the difficulties to successful
utilization was that building codes did not explicitly permit the design. Emmitt (2002) observe
that on one hand changes to regulatory frameworks may provide the opportunity for designers
and manufacturers to work in new ways, and thus innovate, but on the other hand, the regulations
could be seen as reinforcing current practice – which may not be best practice – and so stifle
innovation. This means it is imperative to find out the extent to which building codes and
regulations may constrain the new technology.

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

iv) Socio-economic and Socio-cultural context

The significantly different socio-economic and socio-cultural context of the developing world
from the developed world (where the lifespan concept is originating) also presents a considerable
challenge. Research shows that developing countries still have strong traditions of cooperative
society (CIB & UNEP-IETC, 2002). For example, user perception of certain materials such as
timber and brick, as inferior to materials such as sandcrete blocks, is still strong. There is even a
prejudiced attitude to prefabricated buildings being considered as of lower standard compared to
traditional buildings (Shrechenback and Abankwa, 1983). Moreover, the prevailing economic
conditions of developing countries do not encourage the adoption of advanced technologies such
as prefab systems of building construction (ibid). Thus, the socio-economic and socio-cultural
difference is also an issue of concern.

5.0 OUR RESPONSE AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to fully utilize the Lifespan Building Concept, in developing countries like Ghana, the
following should be considered:

5.1 A Radical Change in Designs Approach

There is the need for a radical change in the approach to design. Kincaid (2002) suggests that for
greater adaptability, buildings must be designed with an appreciable degree of redundancy,
ambiguity and flexibility. Redundancy is the response to uncertainty of future qualitative
demands. For example, while too much floor to ceiling clearance is wasteful in both the long and
short term, too little is always wasteful in the long term, even if uncomfortable. A generous
clearance for a range of possible uses serves both the long and short term. In ambiguity, the
future use of the building is assumed to be uncertain. A variety of possible uses is assumed to be
likely for a building and nothing should be done to constrain unduly the adaptation of a building
to a range of uses. Equally, a single easily defined use for a building should be avoided.
Flexibility allows the creation of spaces within a building which have such a quality of presence
that people adapt their activities to suit the building and not the building to suit their activities.

5.2 Adopting a Performance-based Approach to Specification

The concept of performance specification relates to what products must do rather than what they
must be. In other words, specification focuses on meeting the performance requirements contrary
Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

to the materials and workmanship specifications mostly in use. Thus, it is possible to meet the
objective of designing buildings based on their function. In that way the buildings will be
constructed to meet desired needs from a multi-faceted perspective, ensuring not only value for
money but also harmony between the natural and built environment, as well as the local socio-
cultural context.

5.3 Increased Research and Development Efforts

To master more complex technologies, local capabilities in the form of human capital,
infrastructure and Research and development (R&D) activities are important. R&D deepens
understanding of the underlying principles of new and emerging technologies, ensures ease of
adaptation to local needs and builds the capacity to develop them further (UNCTAD-CSTD,
2005). It is also vital as a means of keeping up with new ones as they emerge. This will, for
instance, be required in the area of new materials technology which satisfies the lifespan concept.

Shrechenback and Abankwa (1983) reported that the economic situation of developing countries
does not encourage the use of prefabricated systems of construction. This requires further
investigation. There is also the need for research into the adoption patterns of building
technologies within the Ghanaian society and the developing context at large. Research efforts
must also focus on understanding the capacity of the national institutional and governance
framework which support innovation adoption in general (National Innovation Systems).

5.4 Investment in Infrastructure for Industrialization and Local Technology Capacity

Building
It is said that in the long run greater wealth and better living standards under any political system
are connected with industrialization (Sutcliff, 1971). The example of the Asian Tigers shows that
this can be achieved through massive investments and modernization of infrastructure such as
factories for building material fabrication, technological innovations, etc. There is also the need
to step up capacity building for field operatives in particular through technology transfer
initiatives via greater collaboration between local and foreign contractors who tend to be more on
the frontiers of new technologies. Incentives of attaching fresh graduates to practicing firms in
the form of tax rebates become useful.

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

5.5 Review of the National Building Regulation

Aspects of the Ghana National Building Regulations (1996) will require revision to emphasize
and explicitly permit standardization and prefabrication, for example. Considerable long-term
benefit can flow from a regulation that all permits to build should require a demonstration that
designs allow for a range of possible building uses or that at least an appropriate range of future
uses is not precluded by the design proposed. Building regulations can respond to these needs. It
can also be reviewed to move towards a set of reusability or recyclability criteria for the
construction of works.

6.0 CONCLUSIONS
This paper has shown that however useful new and emerging (advanced) building technologies
promises to be in effectively meeting the changing needs of modern buildings and building
construction, the peculiar context of developing countries requires that they are critically
examined. This examination will allow for their implications to be well understood and the
associated challenges addressed. Using the Lifespan Building Concept as a case, we have
discussed the implications of such ‘advanced’ building technologies for design philosophy,
buildability and demountability as well as materials specification, selection and use. The key
challenges identified include variations in climatic conditions between the source and destination
countries, the technology capacity of the adopting countries, the existing institutional framework
as well as the socio-economic and socio-cultural context in which they are to be applied.

To meet these challenges, we have recommended that there is the need for a radically new
approach to design allowing for flexibility and adaptability for other future uses, adoption of a
performance-based approach to specification, increased commitment to Research and
Development focused not only on new technologies but also the capacity of the nation to adopt
the technology. In addition, it recommends that it will be necessary to review the National
Building Regulations, while increase investments in local technology capacity building both in
terms of human resource and industrialization.

REFERENCES

Adams, S. (1989). Practical Buildability: CIRIA Design Report. London: CIRIA,

Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

Butterworths
Becker, F., Sims, W., & Davies, B, (1991). Managing Space Efficiently. In Kincaid, D.
(2002). Adapting Buildings for Changing uses: Guildelines for Change of Use
and Refurbishment. London: Spon Press (Taylor and Francis Group).
Brand, S. (1994). “How buildings learn: what happens after they are built?” Penguin, New
York
CIB &UNEP-IETC, (2002), Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing
Countries. Boutek Report No. Bou/E0204. Pretoria, South Africa: Capture Press
Davison, A.G.N, Austin, S.A., and Goodier, C.I. (2006). The Multispace adaptable building
concept and its extension into mass customization. Adaptables2006, TU/e International
Conference on Adaptable Building Structures, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 03-05 July,
2006
Duffy, F. (1990). Measuring Building Performances, MCB University Press. In Post, J.M.,
and Willems, M.H.P.M (n.d). “Towards a New Building Technology”. Eindhoven:
Department of Architecture, Building and Planning, TU/e.
Drewer, S. (1980). Construction and Development: A new Perspective. In Ofori, G (ed).
Challenges of Construction Industries in Developing Countries: Lessons from Various
Countries. Singapore: Department of Building, National University of Singapore
Emmitt, S. (2002). Architectural Technology. London: Blackwell Science.
Fuller, R.B. (1928). 4-D Timelock. In Taylor, E.J. and Levitt, R.J. (eds). A New Model for
Systemic Innovation Diffusion in Project-based Industries. Standford: CIFE
Fuller, R.B. (1983). Grunch of Giants. In Taylor, E.J. and Levitt, R.J. (2004). A New Model
for Systemic Innovation Diffusion in Project-based Industries. Standford: CIFE
Systemic Innovation Diffusion in Project-based Industries. Standford: CIFE
Gelle, R.J and Levine, A. (1999). Sociology: An Introduction. USA, McGraw Hill College
Government of Ghana. (1996). National Building Regulations, 1996. L.I. 1630. Accra,
Ghana.
Gregory, C. (2005). Multispace: adaptable building design Concept. In Davison, A.G.N et
al., (2006). The Multispace adaptable building concept and its extension into mass
customization.
Handy, C. (1991) The Age of Unreason (Portfolios). In Kincaid, D. (2002). Adapting

Sunyani Polytechnic Lecture Series VI

 Innovative Building Systems for Sustainability

Buildings for Changing uses: Guidelines for Change of Use and Refurbishment. London:
Spon Press (Taylor and Francis Group).
Kincaid, D. (2002). Adapting Buildings for Changing uses: Guildelines for Change of Use
and Refurbishment. London: Spon Press (Taylor and Francis Group).

Laing O’Rourke, (2005) ‘Customised office Solutions’. In Davison, A.G.N et al., (eds). The
Multispace adaptable building concept and its extension into mass customization.
Adaptables2006, TU/e International Conference on Adaptable Building Structures,
Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 03-05 July, 2006
Oster et al., (1977) Taylor, E.J. and Levitt, R.J. (2004). A New Model for Systemic
Innovation Diffusion in Project-based Industries. Standford: CIFE, Stanford Universtiy
Post, J.M., and Willems, M.H.P.M (2002). “Towards a New Building Technology”.
Eindhoven: Department of Architecture, Building and Planning, TU/e.
Post, J.M., and Willems, M.H.P.M (2001). “ The XX –Project: saving 45% on resource
depletion”. In C.Anumba et al., (eds), Perspectives on Innovation in Architecture,
Engineering and Construction, (Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on
Innovation in Architecture, Engineering and Construction. Loughborough
Post, J.M., and Willems, M.H.P.M. (2002). “The architectonic detail – complexity,
aesthetics and sustainability” In Post, J.M., and Willems, M.H.P.M. In P.Erkelens
et al (eds). Beyond Sustainable Building, Eindhoven: The Netherlands
Roaf, S. Crichton, D and Nicol, F. (2005) Adapting Buildings and Cities for Climate
Change, London, Architectural Press.
Russell, P. and Moffat, S. (2001). Adaptability of Buildings: Energy related environmental
impact of buildings. In Taylor, E.J. and Levitt, R.J. (eds). A New Model for Systemic
Innovation Diffusion in Project-based Industries. Standford: CIFE
Schrechenback, H. and Abankwa, J.G.K. (1983). Construction Technology for a Tropical
Developing Country: German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ).
Sutcliffe, R. B. Industry and Underdevelopment (Massachusetts Addison – Wesley Publishing
Company 1971), pp. 16-10
Agyefi-Mensah and Kpamma

Taylor, E.J. and Levitt, R.J. (2004). A New Model for Systemic Innovation Diffusion in
Project-based Industries. CIFE, Standford University: Standford
UNCED, (1992), Report on the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, Annex 1, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principle
9, Report No. A.CONF.151/26 (Vol.I)
UNCTAD-CSTD (2005), United Nations Commission on Science and Technology
for Development Inter-sessional panel Rabat, Morocco 10-12 November 2005
Issues Paper on Bridging the technology gap Advanced unedited draft
UNEP, (2001) “Energy and Cities: Sustainable Building and Construction”: Summary of
Main Issues, IETC Side Event at Governing Council. Nairobi, Kenya.
Wiemer et al., (1995). Institutional Design. Kluwer Academy

18