An evidence-based framework validation for building code improvement in New Zealand

PurposeNew Zealand building code may be serving its purpose to an extent, there is still a need to develop a framework to improve the use and application of building code for better building performance and services. This study aims to validate the identified parameters in the developed framework to improve building code practice in New Zealand.Design/methodology/approachSubject matter experts interview was conducted with key stakeholders that use building code, standards and other associated compliance documents.FindingsThe findings from this study establish the importance of improving the building code, and the efficacy of validated framework helps to identify the areas with the most pressing needs within the building regulatory system. All the subject matter experts unanimously agreed on educating and training the building code users. Besides, the validated framework will enable the policy decision-makers in the building regulatory system to promote the use of building code and the utilisation of its potentials in reducing disaster while increasing the built environment resilience. The study concludes that the designed framework will create more robust strategy implementations to enhance innovative solutions embedded in performance-based building code.Originality/valueThis study originality centres on the practical application of an evidence-based framework for performance-based building code, standards and other related compliance documents.

[1]  A. G. Arlani,et al.  Building code assessment framework , 1988 .

[2]  Kelly Wakefield,et al.  Skype interviewing: reflections of two PhD researchers , 2014 .

[3]  J. Creswell.  Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. , 1998 .

[4]  Scott Larmore.  Subject Matter Expert: Working Toward Ensuring The Value In A Project Organization , 2011 .

[5]  S. Wilkinson,et al.  Challenges facing building code compliance in New Zealand , 2020, International Journal of Construction Management.

[6]  T. Umar,et al.  Perceptions on safety climate: a case study in the Omani construction industry , 2018, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Management, Procurement and Law.

[7]  Jason Ingham,et al.  Characterisation of Adaptive Reuse Stakeholders and the Effectiveness of Collaborative Rationality Towards Building Resilient Urban Areas , 2020, Systemic Practice and Action Research.

[8]  Suzanne Wilkinson,et al.  Comparative insight on building code paradigm shift practice and updates: International perspectives , 2019, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering (ICCSTE'19).

[9]  S. Wilkinson,et al.  Promoting Performance-Based Building Code Compliance in New Zealand , 2021 .

[10]  Chris Murphy.  Building control changes: the on-going battle against the leaking building , 2011 .

[11]  Brian J. Meacham,et al.  Performance-based building regulation: current situation and future needs , 2005 .

[12]  Brian J. Meacham,et al.  Accommodating innovation in building regulation: lessons and challenges , 2010 .

[13]  Samantha Jones,et al.  Compliance with the building byelaws and earthquake safety in urban areas of Bihar: progress, constraints and challenges , 2017 .

[14]  John Duncan.  Performance-based building: lessons from implementation in New Zealand , 2005 .

[15]  Raymond J. Burby,et al.  Improving Compliance with Regulations: Choices and Outcomes for Local Government , 1998 .

[16]  Jason Ingham,et al.  Identifying parameters for a performance-based framework: Towards prioritising underutilised historical buildings for adaptive reuse in New Zealand , 2020 .

[17]  W. Neuman,et al.  Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches , 2002 .

[18]  Jason Ingham,et al.  A performance-based framework to prioritise underutilised historical buildings for adaptive reuse interventions in New Zealand , 2019, Sustainable Cities and Society.

[19]  Tom Richards,et al.  An intellectual history of NUD*IST and NVivo , 2002 .

[20]  I. E. Aigwi,et al.  Unintended consequences of the earthquake-prone building legislation: An evaluation of two city centre regeneration strategies in New Zealand's provincial areas , 2020 .

[21]  Brian J. Meacham,et al.  Sustainability and resiliency objectives in performance building regulations , 2016 .

[22]  M. Marshall,et al.  The key informant technique. , 1996, Family practice.

[23]  P. May.  Performance-Based Regulation and Regulatory Regimes: The Saga of Leaky Buildings , 2003 .

[24]  Raymond J. Burby,et al.  Making building codes an effective tool for earthquake hazard mitigation , 1999 .

[25]  P Cardoso-Castro,et al.  A Systems Science Approach to Inter-Organisational Complementarity in Tourism SMEs , 2020 .

[26]  S. Wilkinson,et al.  Building code amendment and building resilience: perspective of building code users in New Zealand , 2021 .

[27]  T. Kwofie,et al.  Regulatory Distress: Architects’ Perspective on Enforcement of Building Regulations in Ghana , 2019, The Construction Industry in the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

[28]  Suzanne Wilkinson,et al.  Why amending building codes? An investigation of the benefits of regular building code amendment in New Zealand , 2021 .

[29]  Jason Ingham,et al.  Efficacy of adaptive reuse for the redevelopment of underutilised historical buildings , 2018, International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation.

[30]  Peter W. Haberecht,et al.  Experience with Durability Assessment and Performance-based Building Codes , 1999 .

[31]  F. M. Meijer,et al.  Building regulations in Europe: Part II - A comparison of technical requirements in eight European countries , 2003 .

[32]  Peter John Mumford,et al.  Enhancing Performance-Based Regulation: Lessons from New Zealand's Building Control System , 2010 .

[33]  Kristi Jackson,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo , 2007 .