hig.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Wallhagen, Marita
Publications (10 of 22) Show all publications
Wallhagen, M., Sörqvist, P., Holmgren, M. & Andersson, H. (2019). Brister i vårt logiska tänkande ett hinder för klimatkloka beslut. Husbyggaren (1), 23-25
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Brister i vårt logiska tänkande ett hinder för klimatkloka beslut
2019 (Swedish)In: Husbyggaren, ISSN 0018-7968, no 1, p. 23-25Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.)) Published
National Category
Building Technologies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-29458 (URN)
Available from: 2019-04-12 Created: 2019-04-12 Last updated: 2019-06-18Bibliographically approved
Petrovic, B., Myhren, J. A., Zhang, X., Wallhagen, M. & Eriksson, O. (2019). Life cycle assessment of a wooden single-family house in Sweden. Applied Energy, 251, Article ID 113253.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Life cycle assessment of a wooden single-family house in Sweden
Show others...
2019 (English)In: Applied Energy, ISSN 0306-2619, E-ISSN 1872-9118, Vol. 251, article id 113253Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

To understand the reasons behind the large environmental impact from buildings the whole life cycle needs to be considered. Therefore, this study evaluates the carbon dioxide emissions in all stages of a single-family house in Sweden from the production of building materials, followed by construction and user stages until the end-of-life of the building in a life cycle assessment (LCA). The methodology applied is attributional life cycle assessment (LCA) based on ‘One Click LCA’ tool and a calculated life span of 100 years. Global warming potential (GWP) and primary energy (PE) are calculated by using specific data from the case study, furthermore the data regarding building materials are based on Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs). The results show that the selection of wood-based materials has a significantly lower impact on the carbon dioxide emissions in comparison with non-wood based materials. The total emissions for this single-family house in Sweden are 6 kg CO 2 e/m 2 /year. The production stage of building materials, including building systems and installations represent 30% of the total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, while the maintenance and replacement part represents 37%. However, energy use during the in-use stage of the house recorded lower environmental impact (21%) due to the Swedish electricity mix that is mostly based on energy sources with low carbon dioxide emissions. The water consumption, construction and the end-of-life stages have shown minor contribution to the buildings total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (12%). The primary energy indicator shows the largest share in the operational phase of the house. © 2019

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2019
Keywords
Carbon dioxide equivalent emission, Environmental product declaration, Global warming potential, Life cycle assessment, Primary energy, Single-family house
National Category
Other Environmental Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-29904 (URN)10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.05.056 (DOI)000471031703144 ()2-s2.0-85065788114 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2019-06-14 Created: 2019-06-14 Last updated: 2019-08-23Bibliographically approved
Magnusson, P., Kihlström, G., Wallhagen, M. & Rambaree, K. (2019). Life‐threatening peripartum cardiomyopathy — not expected when expecting. Clinical Case Reports, 7(6), 1127-1132
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Life‐threatening peripartum cardiomyopathy — not expected when expecting
2019 (English)In: Clinical Case Reports, E-ISSN 2050-0904, Vol. 7, no 6, p. 1127-1132Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Peripartum cardiomyopathy is challenging to diagnose as it mimics symptoms present in normal pregnancy. The clinical course and prognosis are various. In selected cases, a cardioverter implantable defibrillator with/without cardiac resynchronization therapy, mechanical ventricular assist device treatment, and transplantation is indicated.

Keywords
implantable cardioverter defibrillator, left ventricular assist device, peripartum cardiomyopathy, sudden cardiac death, transplantation, wearable cardioverter defibrillator
National Category
Other Medical Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-29544 (URN)10.1002/ccr3.2158 (DOI)000473616800003 ()31183081 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85066962169 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2019-05-07 Created: 2019-05-07 Last updated: 2019-09-30Bibliographically approved
Wallhagen, M., Eriksson, O. & Sörqvist, P. (2018). Gender Differences in Environmental Perspectives among Urban Design Professionals. Buildings, 8(4), Article ID 59.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Gender Differences in Environmental Perspectives among Urban Design Professionals
2018 (English)In: Buildings, ISSN 2075-5309, E-ISSN 2075-5309, Vol. 8, no 4, article id 59Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Urban design professionals are key actors in early design phases and have the possibility to influence urban development and direct it in a more sustainable direction. Therefore, gender differences in environmental perspectives among urban design professionals may have a marked effect on urban development and the environment. This study identified gender differences in environment-related attitudes among urban design professionals involved in the international architectural competition 'A New City Centre for Kiruna' in northern Sweden. Participants' self-rated possibility to influence environmental aspects was higher for males than for females. Conversely, the importance placed on environmental aspects had higher ratings among females, although the differences regarding the rating of personal responsibilitywere small. The gap between the participants' self-rated belief in their ability to influence and rated importance of environmental aspects was larger among female participants. Females placed great importance on environmental aspects even though they felt that their possibility to influence these was rather low. Conversely, male participants felt that they had the greatest possibility to influence, although some males rated the importance of environmental aspects thelowest. The gender differences identified are important froman equality and environmental perspective as they may influence pro-environmental behavior among urban design professionals and ultimately influence the environmental performance of the built environment.

Keywords
Architects, Architectural competition, Environmental aspects, Environmental impact, Gender, Possibility to influence, Pro-environmental behavior, Responsibility, Urban design, Urban planners
National Category
Applied Psychology Civil Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-26529 (URN)10.3390/buildings8040059 (DOI)000430894400013 ()2-s2.0-85045747862 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-05-02 Created: 2018-05-02 Last updated: 2018-06-04Bibliographically approved
Magnusson, P., Olszowka, M., Wallhagen, M. & Koyi, H. (2018). Outcome of implantable loop recorder evaluation. Cardiology Journal, 25(3), 363-370
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Outcome of implantable loop recorder evaluation
2018 (English)In: Cardiology Journal, ISSN 1897-5593, Vol. 25, no 3, p. 363-370Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate implantable loop recorders (ILRs) in an unselected cohort in order to determine diagnostic yield, time to pacemaker/implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation, predictors thereof, safety issues, and syncope management including usage of preceding diagnostic tools.

Methods: Patients who underwent ILR evaluation in any of three centers in Region Gävleborg, Sweden, between April 2007 and April 2013 were included and their medical records retrieved. Logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of pacemaker/ICD outcome expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and Kaplan-Meier estimates for time-dependent analysis.

Results: A total of 173 patients (52.6% females) with a mean age of 56.2 years received an ILR during a mean follow-up of 605 days. In the 146 patients evaluated for syncope/presyncope, 28.1% received a pacemaker (n = 39) or ICD (n = 2). The cumulative incidence at 6, 12, and 18 months were 8.8%, 21.3%, and 26.7%, respectively. Age > 75 years was the only significant predictor for outcome (p = 0.010) and the following variables showed a tendency toward significance: abnormal elevation of the biomarker brain natriuretic peptide (OR 2.05, p = 0.100), a history of trauma (OR 1.71, p = 0.179), and pathologic ECG (OR 1.68, p = 0.231). A computerized tomography of the skull was performed in 52.1% of the syncope cases.

Conclusions: In syncope evaluation in an unselected cohort, 28.1% were diagnosed with an arrhythmia necessitating a pacemaker/ICD. The only significant predictor was advanced age. Time to diagnosis is unpredictable and prolonged ILR monitoring is warranted in addition to optimal use of other diagnostic tools.

Keywords
cardiac arrhythmia, implantable loop recorder, electrocardiography monitoring, pacemaker, syncope
National Category
Clinical Medicine
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-25695 (URN)10.5603/CJ.a2017.0101 (DOI)000437122500009 ()2-s2.0-85048613313 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2017-11-29 Created: 2017-11-29 Last updated: 2018-12-05Bibliographically approved
Wallhagen, M. (2017). Building materials are important for sustainable development (1ed.). In: Fagerström, Arne and Cunnigham, Gary M. (Ed.), A good life for all: Essays on sustainability celebrating 60 years of making life better (pp. 95-101). Mjölby: Atremi AB
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Building materials are important for sustainable development
2017 (English)In: A good life for all: Essays on sustainability celebrating 60 years of making life better / [ed] Fagerström, Arne and Cunnigham, Gary M., Mjölby: Atremi AB , 2017, 1, p. 95-101Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In the current material world human beings consume more natural resources and use more energy than ever before. The consumption of goods connected to planning, design and management of the built environment is seldom highlighted, even though the building and property sector is highly responsible for the use of large amounts of natural resources, production of waste and carbon dioxide emissions. This chapter describes important research that acknowledges environmental impacts of building materials.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Mjölby: Atremi AB, 2017 Edition: 1
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23837 (URN)978-91-7527-174-3 (ISBN)
Available from: 2017-03-31 Created: 2017-03-31 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Wallhagen, M. & Magnusson, P. (2017). Ecological worldview among urban design professionals. Sustainability, 9(4), Article ID 498.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ecological worldview among urban design professionals
2017 (English)In: Sustainability, ISSN 2071-1050, E-ISSN 2071-1050, Vol. 9, no 4, article id 498Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The built environment is responsible for a large proportion of the global use of energy, natural resources, and emissions. Architects and other urban design professionals are key actors in the building process whose behavior and decisions will influence these impacts. Because environmental attitudes are linked to pro-environmental behavior, this study aims to measure environmental worldview among urban design professionals involved in the architectural competition ‘A New City Center for Kiruna’. The mean score registered for the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) scale was 3.68 (standard deviation 0.51) and there were no significant differences with regard to age (mean 41.3 years) or gender (64.7% males). The ecological worldview of the participants was similar to most other samples from diverse countries, but a lower score was reported in comparison to environmentalists. The score ranged from 2.53 to 4.67 which shows heterogeneity at an individual level. Thus, future efforts to improve environmental attitudes among urban design professionals are needed.

Keywords
architectural competition; ecological; environmental paradigm; NEP; pro-environmental behavior; urban design
National Category
Civil Engineering Architecture
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-24104 (URN)10.3390/su9040498 (DOI)000402090300021 ()2-s2.0-85017343305 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2017-06-09 Created: 2017-06-09 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Wallhagen, M., Malmqvist, T. & Eriksson, O. (2017). Professionals' knowledge and use of environmental assessment in an architectural competition. Building Research & Information, 45(4), 426-442
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Professionals' knowledge and use of environmental assessment in an architectural competition
2017 (English)In: Building Research & Information, ISSN 0961-3218, E-ISSN 1466-4321, Vol. 45, no 4, p. 426-442Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In early design phases, architects, landscape architects and urban planners are key actors whose decisions determine the environmental impact of planning and building projects. Environmental and sustainability assessment tools for buildings and neighbourhoods have been developed to promote sustainable building, but their usage has not been thoroughly evaluated. This study investigated self-reported knowledge and usage of such tools among competitors and jury group from 10 European countries involved in the international architectural competition '€˜A New City Centre for Kiruna'€™ in Sweden. The questionnaire revealed that 13% used environmental assessment tools or management systems in the competition, although 47% had used them previously. Tool users reported greater knowledge of how to handle environmental impacts than non-users. However, the self-rated experience of handling various environmental impacts, in the competition and in general, was low for both groups. Nevertheless, the self-rated importance of environmental impacts was high among all participants. Based on this study, it is concluded that environmental assessment tools, issues and goals can be better integrated into the processes of early design in planning and building projects, and in architectural competitions. Furthermore, to limit environmental impacts in building and planning projects, professionals need to be educated about environmental strategies and solutions.

Keywords
architects, architectural competition, assessment tool, environmental assessment, knowledge, neighbourhood, sustainable design, urban design
National Category
Civil Engineering Architecture
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-21332 (URN)10.1080/09613218.2015.1118264 (DOI)000399461700006 ()2-s2.0-84961214754 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2016-03-21 Created: 2016-03-21 Last updated: 2018-12-03Bibliographically approved
Wangel, J., Wallhagen, M., Malmqvist, T. & Finnveden, G. (2016). Certification systems for sustainable neighbourhoods: what do they really certify?. Environmental impact assessment review, 56, 200-213
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Certification systems for sustainable neighbourhoods: what do they really certify?
2016 (English)In: Environmental impact assessment review, ISSN 0195-9255, E-ISSN 1873-6432, Vol. 56, p. 200-213Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Certification systems for sustainable neighbourhoods started to emerge around a decade ago. This study analysed the content, structure, weighting and indicators of two established certification systems for sustainable urban development - BREEAM Communities and LEED for Neighborhood Development. Several limitations of these systems were identified: both have a bias for procedure and feature indicators over indicators that assess actual performance; performance demands are set according to a relative understanding of sustainable development; the focus is on internal sustainability, while upstream and downstream impacts of construction are disregarded; the number and distribution of mandatory issues do not cover essential sustainability aspects; and the disproportionately large number of non-mandatory issues makes benchmarking difficult and signals that sustainability aspects are exchangeable. Altogether, this means that an area can be certified without being sustainable. Moreover, the lack of continuous development of certification requirements in the systems means that they risk exerting a conservative effect on urban development, rather than pushing it forward.

Keywords
Assessment, BREEAM, Certification, Indicators, LEED, Sustainable neighbourhood, Sustainable urban development, Benchmarking, Indicators (instruments), Sustainable development, Urban growth, Neighbourhood, Environmental design
National Category
Environmental Analysis and Construction Information Technology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-20770 (URN)10.1016/j.eiar.2015.10.003 (DOI)000368044600020 ()2-s2.0-84946600419 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Swedish Research Council Formas, 244-2012-248Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, NV-00486-14
Available from: 2015-12-03 Created: 2015-12-03 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Wallhagen, M. (2016). Environmental Assessment Tools for Neighbourhoods and Buildings in relation to Environment, Architecture, and Architects. (Doctoral dissertation). Stockholm: KTH Royal Institute of Technology
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Environmental Assessment Tools for Neighbourhoods and Buildings in relation to Environment, Architecture, and Architects
2016 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

This thesis explores Neighbourhood and Building Environmental Assessment Tools’ (NBEATs’) function as assessment tools and decision support, and their relation to environment, architecture and architects. This is done by analysing, testing, and discussing a number of NBEATs (LEED-NC, Code for Sustainable Homes, EcoEffect, LEED-ND, BREEAM-C, and ENSLIC-tool), their manuals and use. Moreover, professionals’ (architects’) self-rated opinions regarding use and knowledge of NBEATs and environmental aspects are surveyed.

Similarities and differences in NBEATs are found regarding: content, structure, weighting and indicators used. Indicators distinguished as procedure, performance and feature are used to varying extents to assess social, environmental and technical aspects. NBEATs relation to environmental sustainability has limitations due to: non-transparency, tradable indicators, relative measures, low criteria levels, limited life cycle perspective, and exclusion of relevant environmental aspects, such as embedded toxic substances, nutrient cycles, land use change, and ecosystem services. Ratings and architecture are influenced by NBEATs in varying ways. Higher criteria levels would probably increase their impact on architecture. Thus more research regarding NBEATs and links to architectural design, theory and practice is welcomed.

There is limited use of NBEATs as decision support in early design phases such as in architectural competitions. Architects rate the importance of environmental aspects high, but few rate their skill in handling environmental aspects high. This calls for increasing knowledge and know-how of environmental strategies and solutions among architects and adaptation of NBEATs to early design processes. The values NBEATs reflect and the values we want them to create is also important. To support ‘environmental’ architecture, an increased socio-eco-technological system perspective is put forward, and other measures besides NBEATs are needed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2016. p. 112
Series
TRITA-INFRA-FMS-PHD ; 2016:5
Keywords
architects, architecture, buildings, environment, environmental assessment tools, environmental sustainability, neighbourhoods
National Category
Environmental Analysis and Construction Information Technology
Research subject
Planning and Decision Analysis
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-22522 (URN)978-91-7729-123-7 (ISBN)
Public defence
2016-10-21, Kollegiesalen, Brinellvägen 8, KTH, 09:30 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2016-09-28 Created: 2016-09-28 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications