Comparative Assessment of Consumer Attitudes to Timber as a Construction Material in China and Japan

6Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Timber-framed architecture has a long history in both China and Japan. As an eco-friendly construction material, it is universally acknowledged that the use of timber can be conducive to the achievement of sustainable development for architecture. During the past decades, the development of timber-framed buildings in China and Japan appeared significantly different. Consumers' cognition about timber as a construction material has been widely researched by European academics, while there are few such kinds of studies in China, especially the comparative study between China and Japan. To fill this gap, this study aims to figure out consumers' acceptance and attitudes toward timber used as a construction material in China and Japan. By adopting a structured questionnaire method, this study analyzed consumers' thoughts, knowledge, and awareness of modern timber-framed architecture from the consumer level. The results indicate that Chinese and Japanese consumers have the same prejudices regarding the deficiency of timber-frame houses, in terms of fire resistance, acoustic insulation, and durability, while having positive attitudes regarding health and nature, and doubts about environmentally friendly performance. Moreover, the background developing driving forces and developing obstacles have also been analyzed. These results help to provide a better understanding of the challenges and difficulties that the timber-framed house market is facing in China and Japan. Thus, some suggestions were proposed to policymakers, developers, and timber companies for the future development of timber-structure architecture.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, T., Hu, Q., Dewancker, B. J., & Gao, W. (2024). Comparative Assessment of Consumer Attitudes to Timber as a Construction Material in China and Japan. Forest Products Journal, 74(2), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.13073/FPJ-D-23-00059

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free