Chain collaboration can provide a substantial stimulus in terms of adapting housing-association homes to climate change. Knowledge and planning are more manageable and there is greater coherence than in traditional tendering procedures. This has been shown in research carried out by PhD candidate Martin Roders.
For many housing associations, making the housing stock ‘climate-proof’ is something entirely new. Partnering, or supply chain collaboration, can therefore be a smart way to work. “If housing associations involve knowledgeable parties at an early stage in planning, they can make faster progress than they would if they attempted to work out everything themselves,” says Roders. “They just have to make sure they formulate the question properly.”
In his research ‘Partnering for Climate Change Adaptations by Dutch Housing Associations’, Roders examined strategies for tackling two effects of climate change in urban environments: heat, and flooding due to heavy rainfall. Measures for preventing overheating in homes include sun blinds and insulation to keep out heat in the summer and prevent heat loss in the winter. Flooding can be tackled with measures such as green roofs, rainwater tanks and porous pavements. These prevent overloading of the sewage system.
Roders followed seven Dutch pilot projects in renovation that involved partnering. TU Delft – in collaboration with HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht – provided input in the form of knowledge development. In a number of projects, a profit percentage was fixed in advance with the contractor. The housing associations and contractors worked in a fully transparent and open way. This produced extremely positively outcomes, the research shows. Partnering makes projects more predictable, both in terms of finance and completion time, because the client and contractor plan the implementation in more detail than in conventional processes. ‘Co-creation’ also reduced failure costs. When problems arose or there was a risk of cost overrun, client and contractor looked for a solution together.
There were enthusiastic responses in interviews with parties involved, not only because all the projects were completed within budget. “One of the most striking things was the fact that the parties enjoyed working in this way. Things seemed to happen automatically, everyone had a sense of responsibility and attempted to put their best foot forward.” Housing residents were positive because defects were resolved straight away. In the traditional procedure, this would have taken a few days because of the hierarchy of responsibilities.
Notably, partnering did not lead to more innovation and climate-change adaptation. For the parties involved, the partnering approach was the main innovation in their projects. Roders: “Next time, however, they will be ready to work on innovations for homes, because they will have mastered the partnering approach.”
Supply chain collaboration in which housing associations are part of the chain is not something that will become general practice in the coming years, Roders fears. The fact that the supply chain is not established on the basis of competition will be an obstacle, because the finances of the housing associations are monitored very closely. Currently, the MEAT award criteria appear to offer the best opportunities. The work is not awarded to the tenderer who submits the lowest bid, but, for example, to the party that can generate the most economic value. “But the way in which collaboration is established is less important than ensuring that knowledge dissemination does not stagnate.”
The Netherlands has approximately 400 housing associations, and they play a significant role in making urban environments climate-resilient. Housing associations own 32% of the housing stock in the Netherlands. The majority of these homes will have to be modified in the years to come in order to safeguard property values and the liveability of residential areas in a changing climate.