z-logo
Premium
The Growth of Urban Building Stock: Unintended Lock‐in and Embedded Environmental Effects
Author(s) -
Reyna Janet L.,
Chester Mikhail V.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
journal of industrial ecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.377
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1530-9290
pISSN - 1088-1980
DOI - 10.1111/jiec.12211
Subject(s) - demolition , stock (firearms) , residence , built environment , unintended consequences , investment (military) , business , deconstruction (building) , natural resource economics , industrial ecology , environmental planning , environmental resource management , environmental economics , sustainability , environmental science , civil engineering , economics , geography , engineering , ecology , archaeology , politics , political science , law , demographic economics , biology , waste management
Summary Building stocks constitute enduring components of urban infrastructure systems, but little research exists on their residence time or changing environmental impacts. Using Los Angeles County, California, as a case study, a framework is developed for assessing the changes of building stocks in cities (i.e., a generalizable framework for estimating the construction and deconstruction rates), the residence time of buildings and their materials, and the associated embedded environmental impacts. In Los Angeles, previous land‐use decisions prove not easily reversible, and past building stock investments may continue to constrain the energy performance of buildings. The average age of the building stock has increased steadily since 1920 and more rapidly after the post–World War II construction surge in the 1950s. Buildings will likely endure for 60 years or longer, making this infrastructure a quasi‐permanent investment. The long residence time, combined with the physical limitations on outward growth, suggest that the Los Angeles building stock is unlikely to have substantial spatial expansion in the future. The construction of buildings requires a continuous investment in material, monetary, and energetic resources, resulting in environmental impacts. The long residence time of structures implies a commitment to use and maintain the infrastructure, potentially creating barriers to an urban area's ability to improve energy efficiency. The immotility of buildings, coupled with future environmental goals, indicates that urban areas will be best positioned by instituting strategies that ensure reductions in life cycle (construction, use, and demolition) environmental impacts.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here