An investigation of the effects of large houses on occupant behaviour and resource-use in New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Iman Khajehzadeh

<p>According to Statistics New Zealand the average size of new New Zealand houses almost doubled from 1974‐2011 at the same time that occupancy reduced, meaning fewer people live in larger houses. Features of large houses are extra bedrooms, specialised rooms (e.g. study, media room), more than one living space, several bathrooms (including en‐suites), and double/triple garages. This contrasts with what is defined in this thesis as the “core house”, which is a house (or part of a house) consisting of a living room, a dining room, a kitchen, and a bedroom for each occupant (assuming couples share a bedroom). Based on this, houses with more space than the appropriate core house for each household are considered as living in some level of large housing.  Living in larger houses than necessary means use of more natural resources in terms of construction materials, operating energy and the additional furniture and appliances needed. This study, therefore, aimed to measure resource‐use efficiency in different sized houses and rooms found in NZ houses to show the significance of human decisions on housing energy use. To do this, it used a life‐cycle energy approach to measure resource‐use and reveal the long term environmental impact of house size decision. A 100 year cycle was used to cover typical human lifespan.  Using grounded theory, the research developed into four studies:  1‐ An observation of the features of New Zealand houses: Houses advertised for sale in TradeMe website were studied to show the features of New Zealand houses and types of furniture and appliances people keep in their houses.  2‐ Study 1: Based on the observation study, a questionnaire was prepared for a pilot study of 7 households living in small and large houses asking about occupants, type/number of rooms and types/number/location of furniture/appliances in their house. Each occupant also reported where he/she spend his/her time at home indoor for 14 consecutive days. This study revealed any problems with the preliminary questionnaire and also set strategy for the large time‐use survey.  3‐ Study 2: Based on the results of study 1, an online questionnaire based survey was undertaken by families with 4 or fewer members living in NZ owner‐occupied houses. The questionnaire asked for information about family members, type/number of spaces in their home, furniture and its location and the time spent in each room of the house, outdoors, and out of home by each occupant over one day. This survey provided a reliable data set about the features of New Zealand owner‐occupied houses and their occupants, the type an number of furniture items, appliances and tools in them and where/for how long each household member spent his/her daily time in the house.  4‐ Floor plan study: To get a better understanding of the size of rooms in NZ houses, a floor plan study of 287 houses was performed. Floor plans were redrawn in AutoCAD and the floor area of each room and the whole house were extracted for mapping with house size in SPSS.  Results of the time‐use study indicate New Zealanders on average spend 15.94 hours/day at home indoor and house size does not affect this. On average 54.7% of this is spent in usual bedrooms, 29.9% in the usual living room, dining room and kitchen, and use of other rooms including bathrooms accounts for 15.4% of time at home indoors.  Using a life cycle analysis approach, selecting to live in a house with 3 extra rooms, a single person, couple, couple with one child and couple with two children will use 66%, 66%, 75% and 66% more energy for housing over 100 years. By combining time‐use and energy use results, a sample person living in a house with no extra rooms for their whole life will have a housing energy of 1.59GJ/hour which increases to 2.68GJ/hour by living in a house with 3 extra rooms. Based on resources for construction, refurbishment and heating and the time occupants spend in each room over the life the house, for each hour of using a master bedroom New Zealanders use 0.9MJ, and this increases to 9.3MJ for an hour of using a study and 5.1MJ for a play room.  This research suggests more public awareness is needed regarding the role of human behaviour in achieving a sustainable architecture and perhaps it is time for governments to control use of natural resources by restricting house sizes where applicable.</p>

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Iman Khajehzadeh

<p>According to Statistics New Zealand the average size of new New Zealand houses almost doubled from 1974‐2011 at the same time that occupancy reduced, meaning fewer people live in larger houses. Features of large houses are extra bedrooms, specialised rooms (e.g. study, media room), more than one living space, several bathrooms (including en‐suites), and double/triple garages. This contrasts with what is defined in this thesis as the “core house”, which is a house (or part of a house) consisting of a living room, a dining room, a kitchen, and a bedroom for each occupant (assuming couples share a bedroom). Based on this, houses with more space than the appropriate core house for each household are considered as living in some level of large housing.  Living in larger houses than necessary means use of more natural resources in terms of construction materials, operating energy and the additional furniture and appliances needed. This study, therefore, aimed to measure resource‐use efficiency in different sized houses and rooms found in NZ houses to show the significance of human decisions on housing energy use. To do this, it used a life‐cycle energy approach to measure resource‐use and reveal the long term environmental impact of house size decision. A 100 year cycle was used to cover typical human lifespan.  Using grounded theory, the research developed into four studies:  1‐ An observation of the features of New Zealand houses: Houses advertised for sale in TradeMe website were studied to show the features of New Zealand houses and types of furniture and appliances people keep in their houses.  2‐ Study 1: Based on the observation study, a questionnaire was prepared for a pilot study of 7 households living in small and large houses asking about occupants, type/number of rooms and types/number/location of furniture/appliances in their house. Each occupant also reported where he/she spend his/her time at home indoor for 14 consecutive days. This study revealed any problems with the preliminary questionnaire and also set strategy for the large time‐use survey.  3‐ Study 2: Based on the results of study 1, an online questionnaire based survey was undertaken by families with 4 or fewer members living in NZ owner‐occupied houses. The questionnaire asked for information about family members, type/number of spaces in their home, furniture and its location and the time spent in each room of the house, outdoors, and out of home by each occupant over one day. This survey provided a reliable data set about the features of New Zealand owner‐occupied houses and their occupants, the type an number of furniture items, appliances and tools in them and where/for how long each household member spent his/her daily time in the house.  4‐ Floor plan study: To get a better understanding of the size of rooms in NZ houses, a floor plan study of 287 houses was performed. Floor plans were redrawn in AutoCAD and the floor area of each room and the whole house were extracted for mapping with house size in SPSS.  Results of the time‐use study indicate New Zealanders on average spend 15.94 hours/day at home indoor and house size does not affect this. On average 54.7% of this is spent in usual bedrooms, 29.9% in the usual living room, dining room and kitchen, and use of other rooms including bathrooms accounts for 15.4% of time at home indoors.  Using a life cycle analysis approach, selecting to live in a house with 3 extra rooms, a single person, couple, couple with one child and couple with two children will use 66%, 66%, 75% and 66% more energy for housing over 100 years. By combining time‐use and energy use results, a sample person living in a house with no extra rooms for their whole life will have a housing energy of 1.59GJ/hour which increases to 2.68GJ/hour by living in a house with 3 extra rooms. Based on resources for construction, refurbishment and heating and the time occupants spend in each room over the life the house, for each hour of using a master bedroom New Zealanders use 0.9MJ, and this increases to 9.3MJ for an hour of using a study and 5.1MJ for a play room.  This research suggests more public awareness is needed regarding the role of human behaviour in achieving a sustainable architecture and perhaps it is time for governments to control use of natural resources by restricting house sizes where applicable.</p>


2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iman Khajehzadeh ◽  
Brenda Vale ◽  
Nigel Isaacs

House interiors are affected by outdoor and indoor pollutants although levels of exposure differ with room type. The times people spend in rooms also differ, and hence their potential level of exposure, which is the focus of this article. Additionally, time spent in a kitchen during cooking, which is the main source of indoor particulates for non-smoking households, could affect indoor air quality in other rooms, especially where the kitchen is part of an open plan arrangement. This study investigated the time people spend in all rooms including kitchens and open plan kitchen/dining/living in New Zealand houses. On average, New Zealanders spend 54% of time at home indoors in usual bedrooms and 29%–36% in a living room, dining room, and kitchen (or combination of these). People in open plan houses spend less time in living areas than those in cellular plan houses, but effectively more time in the ‘kitchen’. Given time spent in a combined living room/dining/kitchen, combined living room/kitchen or combined dining room/kitchen is effectively time spent in a kitchen, people spend respectively 3.23, 1.36 and 0.53 h/day more in the kitchen compared to those having a separate kitchen, which could increase their chance of exposure to kitchen pollutants.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 3972
Author(s):  
Azin Velashjerdi Farahani ◽  
Juha Jokisalo ◽  
Natalia Korhonen ◽  
Kirsti Jylhä ◽  
Kimmo Ruosteenoja ◽  
...  

The global average air temperature is increasing as a manifestation of climate change and more intense and frequent heatwaves are expected to be associated with this rise worldwide, including northern Europe. Summertime indoor conditions in residential buildings and the health of occupants are influenced by climate change, particularly if no mechanical cooling is used. The energy use of buildings contributes to climate change through greenhouse gas emissions. It is, therefore, necessary to analyze the effects of climate change on the overheating risk and energy demand of residential buildings and to assess the efficiency of various measures to alleviate the overheating. In this study, simulations of dynamic energy and indoor conditions in a new and an old apartment building are performed using two climate scenarios for southern Finland, one for average and the other for extreme weather conditions in 2050. The evaluated measures against overheating included orientations, blinds, site shading, window properties, openable windows, the split cooling unit, and the ventilation cooling and ventilation boost. In both buildings, the overheating risk is high in the current and projected future average climate and, in particular, during exceptionally hot summers. The indoor conditions are occasionally even injurious for the health of occupants. The openable windows and ventilation cooling with ventilation boost were effective in improving the indoor conditions, during both current and future average and extreme weather conditions. However, the split cooling unit installed in the living room was the only studied solution able to completely prevent overheating in all the spaces with a fairly small amount of extra energy usage.


Author(s):  
Su Yeon Roh ◽  
Ik Young Chang

To date, the majority of research on migrant identity negotiation and adjustment has primarily focused on adults. However, identity- and adjustment-related issues linked with global migration are not only related to those who have recently arrived, but are also relevant for their subsequent descendants. Consequently, there is increasing recognition by that as a particular group, the “1.5 generation” who were born in their home country but came to new countries in early childhood and were educated there. This research, therefore, investigates 1.5 generation South Koreans’ adjustment and identity status in New Zealand. More specifically, this study explores two vital social spaces—family and school—which play a pivotal role in modulating 1.5 generation’s identity and adjustment in New Zealand. Drawing upon in-depth interviewing with twenty-five 1.5 generation Korean-New Zealanders, this paper reveals that there are two different experiences at home and school; (1) the family is argued to serve as a key space where the South Korean 1.5 generation confirms and retains their ethnic identity through experiences and embodiments of South Korean traditional values, but (2) school is almost the only space where the South Korean 1.5 generation in New Zealand can acquire the cultural tools of mainstream society through interaction with English speaking local peers and adults. Within this space, the South Korean 1.5 generation experiences the transformation of an ethnic sense of identity which is strongly constructed at home via the family. Overall, the paper discusses that 1.5 generation South Koreans experience a complex and contradictory process in negotiating their identity and adjusting into New Zealand through different involvement at home and school.


2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-401
Author(s):  
Katia Ferrar ◽  
Carol Maher ◽  
John Petkov ◽  
Tim Olds

Background:To date, most health-related time-use research has investigated behaviors in isolation; more recently, however, researchers have begun to conceptualize behaviors in the form of multidimensional patterns or clusters.Methods:The study employed 2 techniques: radar graphs and centroid vector length, angles and distance to quantify pairwise time-use cluster similarities among adolescents living in Australia (N = 1853) and in New Zealand (N = 679).Results:Based on radar graph shape, 2 pairs of clusters were similar for both boys and girls. Using vector angles (VA), vector length (VL) and centroid distances (CD), 1 pair for each sex was considered most similar (boys: VA = 63°, VL = 44 and 50 units, and CD = 48 units; girls: VA = 23°, VL = 65 and 85 units, and CD = 36 units). Both methods employed to determine similarity had strengths and weaknesses. Conclusions: The description and quantification of cluster similarity is an important step in the research process. An ability to track and compare clusters may provide greater understanding of complex multidimensional relationships, and in relation to health behavior clusters, present opportunities to monitor and to intervene.


2014 ◽  
Vol 59 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 844-859 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.H. Snelder ◽  
H.L. Rouse ◽  
P.A. Franklin ◽  
D.J. Booker ◽  
N. Norton ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document