A Global Problem of a Climate Change - Essay Example

Running Head: CLIMATE CHANGE-A GLOBAL PROBLEM Climate Change - A Global Problem. How can Professionals Help? [Your Uni] Contents Table Page 1.0 Introduction 3 1.1 Aim 4 1.2 Objectives 4 1.3 Research Question 4 2.0 Epistemology 4 3.0 Theory/Model 5 4.0 Literature Review 6 5.0 Method 7 5.1 Method and Data Collection 7 5.2 Materials 8 5.3 Design 8 5.4 Procedure 9 5.5 Timetable 9 6.0 Conclusion 10 References 11 “Unknowingly, the architecture and building community is responsible for almost half of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions annually. Globally the percentage is even greater.” - Ed Mazria (Architectural ecologist, 2000) Climate Change - A Global Problem, How can Professionals Help? 1.0 Introduction Currently, Western lifestyles reflect a disturbing and destructive trend toward global warming. It is recognized within the discipline of architecture that the profession has a responsibility in limiting and constraining pollution and the contribution to climate change. Literature reports that the building industry may be responsible for almost 50% of greenhouse gases (Roaf & Chriton, 2005). This may be due to the rapid increase of the building sector within industrialized and developing nations (Adger & Kelly, 1999). It has been stated that the rises in global temperature need to be reduced to less than two degrees Centigrade above pre-industrial levels to avoid disastrous impacts (Betsill, 2006). This research study will focus on the profession of architecture specifically, to determine how the professionals have a role in current trends of climate change. Firstly, the aims and objectives of this study will be presented. Secondly a critical analysis of the relevant and up-to-date literature will be outlined. Next, the methodology, method and data collection technique for this research project will be outlined and justified. Following, a timetable of duties and their timeline will be illustrated. Finally, a conclusion shall synthesise the main points of this proposal and demonstrate the value of this study in determining the place of professional architects in climate change. 1.1 Aim The aim is to identify the place for professional architects in determining how to limit climate change, by evaluating their attitudes toward climate change and their responsibilities as architects. It is anticipated that this project will indicate directions for a global approach by architects as to how to approach limitation of climate change. 1.2 Objectives 1) To determine characteristics which differentiate architectural attitudes and perceptions of responsibility with regard to climate change. 2) To review current discourse and literature as to the use of follow-up skeletal surveys in the assessment of suspected child abuse. 3) To design and carry out a valid and reliable research study. 4) To contribute to the extension of knowledge within the profession of architecture. 1.3 Research Question Can the identification of the perceptions and attitudes of professional architects toward the issue of climate change inform the profession as to how to limit the effects of climate change? 2.0 Epistemology Scientific inquiry using the scientific method requires investigation that aims to answer a question in a systematic manner, relying on a predefined set of procedures to collect evidence, and to produce results that were not known of in advance and that can be applied beyond the immediate study (Morris, 2005). This is a set of procedures used to investigate a research question to acquire new knowledge about the world, or to correct and integrate previous knowledge, using observable and measurable data, which is subject to the laws of reasoning and logic. Research methods are employed to control for extraneous variables that may influence the results of measurements, and to guard against investigator bias, or the subjective bias of the participant. Empirical data is used to depersonalize the issue, to focus on substantive concerns, and to educate the public about how corruption negatively affects them socially, environmentally and economically. 3.0 Theory/Model These concerns are oriented toward a ‘greater common good,’ or in a more formal jargon, ‘Social Responsibility of architects. This has been stated as, "The continuing commitment by [business] to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large (The World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2005). It is a necessary step, because at present business competition can catalyze the de-structuring of the social edifice based on values, morals and a sense of social responsibility. The model of "collective action" explains the recent trend of the emergence and influence of professional architects to try and make a difference to climate change (King, 2007). The collective action draws together individual stakeholders and aids in the development of a common identity and united interests, providing a way for strategic stakeholder action. Three identified factors of collective action are; 1) mobilizing structures; 2) professional opportunities; and 3) framing processes. Focusing on collective action that will enable stakeholder influence will further understanding of negotiation processes that may be required between architects, policy makers, ecological needs and public expectations. 4.0 A Review of the Literature It is critical that professional architects step up and take responsibility for their part in reducing pollution and limiting the negative effects of climate change. Much of the literature exploring this concern advocates for architects to start making changes now to their practices and policies to reduce negative impacts over the next 10 years, as after this, the pollution threshold will have been passed (Mazria, 2005). The goal for many professional architects within the UK is to develop innovative solutions to address or even reverse these negative effects. One possible solution is zero emissions from building constructions, the transport of materials to sites and their original production (Royal Institute of British Architects [RIBA], 2005). The Stern Report pointed to the potential economic costs of climate change, such as all countries being affected and a warming of 4° C or more will likely result in global flooding (The Stern Report, 2007). However, it appears that many architects are in climate denial, as by and large there is not responsibility being taken for the huge energy consumption that goes into materials and buildings that contribute to almost 50% of greenhouse gases. There also appears to be little proactive engagement in creation of policies and structures to enable a low carbon economy. This is often reflected by the professionals who achieve architectural awards for outstanding projects that do not embody the reality of climate change. In fact, it has been highlighted that many of the innovative and expressive designs of 21st century architecture are delivered by way of technology and materials that do not reflect a low carbon sustainable economy. It has been suggested that 50-80% of fossil fuel consumption can be reduced by way of architectural design, and that through building large reductions of consumption can be achieved in cost-effective ways. Ways to achieve reduction, without incurring additional costs include; proper siting, building form, material selection, glass properties, and location; as well as photovoltaics, solar hot water, wind power, day lighting strategies, and natural heating, cooling, and ventilation. Pressure from architects on governments to pass legislation for building projects to halve their energy consumption is required to achieve such reductions. However, little literature exists which has actively investigated the perceptions of architects as to their responsibilities in limiting or reversing climate change, and of their attitudes toward climate change as a global phenomenon. 5.0 Method 5.1 Method and Data Collection A quasi-experimental research design does not use random allocation of participants to groups instead they are self-selecting (Bryman, 2002). Due to the lack of random allocation the results of quasi-experiments cannot be generalized to a wider population with as much confidence as with an experimental design. The quasi-experiment can provide a more real-world context in that the groups are self-selecting; although a drawback of this is regression to the mean effects, so that alternative explanations of the results can be provided for results (Mason, 1997). As such, the quasi-experiment has several risks for its internal validity. As a statistical tool a survey measures quantitative data about characteristics in a population, such as employee attitudes toward management style. A set of questions (items) are responded to by participants, and this provides demographic, attitudinal and in some cases, observational data. Hence, a survey is a method for eliciting, recording and collecting information from participants (Rogelberg, 2002). The structured responses are easy to answer however the question may not measure all that occurs in the respondent’s mind, such as the number of options on a multiple choice item. The items can be ordered so as to try not to influence the responses to subsequent questions. Structured surveys are better able to control for biases in the form of reliability and validity checks. Each participant must receive/access the same questions, in the same order, as other respondents (Tabachnick & Fiddel, 2006). Focus groups are a form of group interviewing but it is important to distinguish between the two. Focus groups rely on interaction within the group based on topics that are supplied by the researcher (Mason, 1997). Hence the key characteristic is the insight and data produced by the interaction between participants. Overall the goal of the focus group is to engage the respondent’s to share their attitudes, feelings and experiences in a phenomenological way; the moderator being present simply to guide the proceedings towards discussion of particular topics. The focus group enables a researcher to gain a large amount of data in a short period of time (Mack et al, 2005). Unfortunately, focus groups are limited in their ability to generalize their results (Bryman, 2004). This tends to be because only a small number of people are able to take part in the group otherwise the group becomes unwieldy. As such, it is unlikely that participants are representative of a wider population. 5.2 Materials A survey will be designed for this study, used pre and post to determine if participants who take part in the focus group have attitudinal changes. Demographic information (age, gender, architectural role, length of time in industry, believe climate change is occurring naturally or due to pollution), and 10, 5-point Likert scale items to identify perceptions toward architectures role in limiting climate change and the professions responsibility. A Cronbachs alpha test will determine the internal reliability of the survey. The survey will yield a total score for analysis. 5.3 Design A pre-post survey will be used with a group of architects who will take part in a focus group between surveys. Percentages and other descriptive statistics will be obtained during analysis and thematic analysis will be used for the focus group transcripts. Parametric tests will include Pearsons correlations of survey totals and descriptives, and a t-test of pre-post survey scores. 5.3 Procedure Participants will need to be able to attend a focus group session at an appointed time and location (estimated to go for 2 hours). Prior to focus session a pre-questionnaire will be given for their completion, after informed consent has been provided by the participant. Then the focus groups session. The post-questionnaire will then be completed. Participants will be thanked for their contribution, and the true hypothesis revealed to them. They will have the opportunity to ask questions. And will be given a website address to log onto when thesis has been submitted to access a summary of the study results. 5.4 Timetable MONTH DUTIES Feb Mar April May June July Sept Oct Nov Literature Review Recruitment Data Collection Analyses Final Thesis 6.0 Conclusion It is clear that there is no universal solution to climate change. However, it is evident that architects play a key role in the limitation or reversal of this global phenomenon by way of making changes to attitudes, perceptions of responsibility, and policies and practices with regard to the manufacture, transportation and use of building materials. The use of a focus group and the pre-post investigation of attitudes of architects toward climate change and their responsibilities could indicate more positive lines of enquiry, and ways to approach undergraduate study, later professional development, and practices in the field as well as policy developments by governments. This research has implications for education of architects, current practices and policy development within the UK and perhaps globally. References Adger, W.N., & Kelly, P.M (1999) Social vulnerability to climate change and the architecture of entitlements. Mitigation and Adaption Strategies for Global Change, 4(3-4), 253-266. Betsill, M.M. (2006) Cities and the Multi-level Governance of Global Climate Change. London, Routledge. Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods, 2nd ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Her Majestys Treasury (2007) The Stern Report. Retrieved April 2, 2007, from http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/Independent_Reviews/stern_review_economics_ climate_change/sternreview_index.cfm Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K. M., Guest, G., & Namey, E. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods: A data collectors field guide. Retrieved 26th April, 2006 from: http://www.fhi.org/en/RH/Pubs/booksReports/QRM_datacoll.htm Mason, J. (1997). Qualitative Researching: An introductory text. New York: Sage Publications. Mazria, E. (2005) Architecture 2030. Retrieved April 2, 2007 from www.architecture2030.org Morris, T. (2005) Research Methods. New York: Sage Publications. Padget, D.K. (2004) The Qualitative Research Experience. Southbank, Thompson Learning. Patton, M.Q. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Roaf, S. & Crichton, D. (2005) Adapting Buildings and Cities for Climate Change. London, Architectural Press. Rogelberg, S. G. (2002). Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford : Blackwell Publishing. Royal Institute of British Architects [RIBA] (2005) Architecture and climate change. Retrieved April 2, 2007, from http://www.riba.org/go/RIBA/Home.html Tabachnick, G.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2006) Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed). Boston, Allyn & Bacon. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2005) Sustainable development. Retrieved April 2, 2007, from http://www.wbcsd.ch/templates/TemplateWBCSD5/layout.asp?MenuID=1 Read More