What you see is not what you get: single-family house renovation and energy retrofit seen through the lens of sociomateriality

References

• Archtnicht, M. and Madelner, R., 2014. Factors influencing German house owners’ preferences on energy retrofits. Energy policy, 68, 254–263.10.1016/j.enpol.2014.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartiaux, F., et al., 2014. A practice–theory approach to homeowners' energy retrofits in four European areas. Building research and information, 42 (4), 525–538.10.1080/09613218.2014.900253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bijker, W., 1995. Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: toward a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bijker, W.E., 1997. Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boverket, 2010. Energi i bebyggelsen, tekniska egenskaper och beräkningar: Resultat från projektet BETSI [Energy in buildings, technical characteristics and calculations: Results from the project BETSI]. Stockholm: Boverket Publikationsservice.
   Google Scholar
• Boverket, 2015. Förslag till utvecklad nationell strategi för energieffektiviserande renovering Boverket [Proposal to develop national strategy for energy efficient renovation]. Stockholm: Boverket Publikationsservice.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, P., Larsen, G.D., and Schweber, L., 2015. The co-development of technology and new buildings: incorporating building integrated photovoltaics. Construction management and economics, 33 (5–6), 349–360.10.1080/01446193.2015.1074262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bresnen, M. and Harty, C., 2010. Editorial: objects, knowledge sharing and knowledge transformation in projects. Construction management and economics, 28 (6) 549–555.
   Google Scholar
• Bryman, B. and Bell, E., 2011. Business research methods, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buser, M. and Carlsson, V., 2015. Stepping out of the canvas: small construction enterprises experimenting with business models. In: The 23rd Nordic Academy of Management Conference (NFF), Copenhagen DK, August 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Carlile, P.R., et al., eds., 2013. How matter matters: objects, artifacts and materiality in organization studies. Oxford: Oxford press.
   Google Scholar
• Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., et al., 2014. The sociomateriality of information systems: current status, future directions. Management information systems quarterly, 38 (3), 809–830.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, T., et al., 2014. Energy retrofits of Danish homes: is the energy certificate useful? Building research and information, 42 (4), 489–500.10.1080/09613218.2014.908265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clegg, S., et al., 2013. Mundane objects and the banality of evil: the sociomateriality of a death camp. Journal of management inquiry, 22 (3), 325–340.10.1177/1056492612461949
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czarniawska, B., 2007. Shadowing and other techniques for doing fieldwork in modern societies. Malmö: Liber and Copenhagen Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doona, J. and Jarlbro, G., 2009. Grannen vet bäst - Faktorer som påverkar hushållens val av energiformer [Neighbors know best - the factors which impact on the house owners choice of energy source]. Stockholm: Svensk Fjärrvame AB.
   Google Scholar
• EU, 2010. Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance of buildings. Bruxelles: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Galvin, R. and Sunikka-Blank, M., 2014. The UK homeowner-retrofitter as an innovator in a socio-technical system. Energy policy, 74, 655–662.10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haines, V. and Mitchell, V., 2014. A persona-based approach to domestic energy retrofit. Building research and information, 42 (4), 462–476.10.1080/09613218.2014.893161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harty, C., 2008. Implementing innovation in construction: contexts, relative boundedness and actor-network theory. Construction management and economics, 26 (10), 1029–1041.10.1080/01446190802298413
   Google Scholar
• Jones, M., 2014. A matter of life and death: exploring conceptualizations of sociomateriality in the context of critical care. MIS quarterly, 38 (3), 895–925.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judson, E. and Maller, C., 2014. Housing renovations and energy efficiency: insights from homeowners’ practices. Building research and information, 42 (4), 501–511.10.1080/09613218.2014.894808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Killip, G., 2013. Transition management using a market transformation approach: lessons for theory, research, and practice from the case of low-carbon housing refurbishment in the UK. Environment and planning C: government and policy, 31 (5), 876–892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina, Karin, 1999. Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B., 2005. Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leonardi, P., 2013. Theoretical foundations for the study of sociomateriality. Information and organization, 23 (2), 59–76.10.1016/j.infoandorg.2013.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonardi, P.M., Nardi, B.A. and Kallinikos, J., eds., 2012. Materiality and organizing: social interaction in a technological world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mahapatra, K., Nair, G., and Gustavsson, L., 2011. Energy advice service as perceived by Swedish homeowners. International journal of consumer studies, 35, 104–111.10.1111/ijc.2011.35.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokhlesian, S. and Holmen, M., 2012. Business model changes and green construction processes. Construction management and economics, 30, 761–775.10.1080/01446193.2012.694457
   Google Scholar
• Monteiro, E., Almklov, P., and Hepsø, V., 2012. Living in a sociomaterial world. In: A. Bhattacherjee and B. Fitzgerald, eds. Shaping the future of ICT research: methods and approaches. IFIP WG 8.2 Working Conference (Vol. 389). Springer, 91–107.10.1007/978-3-642-35142-6
   Google Scholar
• Mortensen, A., Heiselberg, P., and Knudstrup, M., 2014. Economy controls energy retrofits of Danish single-family houses. Comfort, indoor environment and architecture increase the budget. Energy and buildings, 72, 465–475.10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.12.054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, M., 2013. Diffusion dynamics of energy-efficient renovations. Causalities and policy recommendations. Lecture notes in energy (Vol. 14). Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-37175-2
   Google Scholar
• Mutch, A., 2013. Sociomateriality – Taking the wrong turning? Information and organization, 23 (1), 28–40.10.1016/j.infoandorg.2013.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S., and Yanow, D., eds., 2003. Knowing in organizations: a practice-based approach. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W., 2007. Sociomaterial practices: exploring technology at work. Organization studies, 28, 1435–1448.10.1177/0170840607081138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. and Scott, S., 2008. Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2, 433–474.10.1080/19416520802211644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, A. and Mitchell, G., 2015. Outside influence – Some effects of retrofit installers and advisors on energy behaviours in households. Indoor and built environment, 24 (7), 925–936.10.1177/1420326X15600775
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, A., Mitchell, G., and Gouldson, A., 2014. An unseen influence – The role of low carbon retrofit advisers and installers in the adoption and use of domestic energy technology. Energy policy, 73, 169–179.10.1016/j.enpol.2014.06.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parmiggiani, E. and Mikalsen, M., 2013. The facets of sociomateriality: a systematic mapping of emerging concepts and definitions. I In: Nordic contributions in IS Research: 4th Scandinavian Conference on Information Systems, SCIS 2013, Oslo, Norway. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Parnell, R. and Larsen, O.P., 2005. Informing the development of domestic energy efficiency initiatives an everyday householder-centered framework. Environment and behavior, 37 (6), 787–807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Risholt, B.D. and Berker, T., 2013. Success for energy efficient renovation of dwellings – Learning from private homeowners. Energy policy, 61, 1022–1030.10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sage, D., et al., 2014. Building with wildlife: project geographies and cosmopolitics in infrastructure construction. Construction management and economics, 32 (7–8), 773–786.10.1080/01446193.2014.911933
   Google Scholar
• Schweber, L. and Harty, C., 2010. Actors and objects: a socio-technical networks approach to technology uptake in the construction sector. Construction management and economics, 28 (6), 657–674.10.1080/01446191003702468
   Google Scholar
• Star, S.L. and Griesemer, J.R., 1989. Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907–39. Social studies of science, 19 (3), 387–420.10.1177/030631289019003001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Styhre, A. and Gluch, P., 2010. Managing knowledge in platforms: boundary objects and stocks and flows of knowledge. Construction management and economics, 28 (6), 589–599.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L., 2000. Organizing alignment: a case of bridge-building. Organization, 7 (2), 311–327.10.1177/135050840072007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor-Powell, E. and Renner, M., 2003. Analyzing qualitative data. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Extension.
   Google Scholar
• Tryggestad, K., Georg, S., and Hernes, T., 2010. Constructing buildings and design ambitions. Construction management and economics, 28 (6), 695–705.10.1080/01446191003755441
   Google Scholar
• Tryggestad, K., Justesen, L., and Mouritsen, J., 2013. Project temporalities: how frogs can become stakeholders. International journal of managing projects in business, 6 (1), 69–87.10.1108/17538371311291035
   Google Scholar
• Vlasova, L. and Gram-Hanssen, K., 2014. Incorporating inhabitants’ everyday practices into domestic retrofits. Building research and information, 42 (4), 512–524.10.1080/09613218.2014.907682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webber, P., Gouldson, A., and Kerr, N., 2015. The impacts of household retrofit and domestic energy efficiency schemes: a large scale, ex post evaluation. Energy policy, 84, 35–43.10.1016/j.enpol.2015.04.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whyte, J., 2011. Managing digital coordination of design: emerging hybrid practices in an institutionalized project setting. Engineering project organization journal, 1 (3), 159–168.10.1080/21573727.2011.597743
   Google Scholar
• Whyte, J., 2013. Beyond The computer: changing medium from digital to physical. Information and organization, 23 (1), 41–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whyte, J. and Lobo, S., 2010. Coordination and control in project-based work: digital objects and infrastructures for delivery. Construction management and economics, 28 (6), 557–567.
   Google Scholar
• Yaneva, A., 2008. How buildings ‘surprise’: the renovation of the Alte Aula in Vienna. Science studies, 21 (1), 8–28.
   Google Scholar