Creating State of the Art? A Passive House University Hospital North of the Polar Circle

Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Energy book series (SPE)


The recent Norwegian passive house legislation has raised concerns as to whether the building industry was able to build cost-efficient buildings, without overspending tax payers’ money and having negative consequences for peripheral areas in particular in the very north part of the country. This paper aims at exploring and analyzing how these challenges created by the new legislation has been met during building of a new hospital block in Tromsø, the A-wing. Building on sustainable transition theory which identifies several recombinant dynamics, both public and private, we define the building of passive houses as a societal development encompassing dynamics like company development, personnel competences, as well as architectural, engineering and production methods. The empirical material draws on interviews, analysis of documents relative to the project and public media material. The case study revealed a mixture of recurrent, and specific cold climate challenges: some are directly related to passive house technologies, such as issues with the façade, others indirectly, such as Tromsø being a remote market for material and labour. The project encountered delays, shift in contracts and cost augmentations. Competences had to be developed and combined to achieve the standards of passive house building and the local workforce was complemented by adding workers from other regions and markets; the south and middle Norwegian, Nordic, Baltic and East European countries. Accordingly, the project was not isolated in the northern part of Norway and its challenges appeared to be rather organizational and managerial than technical.


Passive house Hospital Sustainable transition 


  1. 1.
    Stortinget: Innstilling til Stortinget fra energi- og miljøkomiteen klimapolitikk. Innstilling 390 S. Stortinget. Oslo (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Georges, M. Berner, H.M. Mathisen, Air heating of passive houses in cold climates: investigation using detailed dynamic simulations. Build. Environ. 74, 1–12 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Markard, R. Raven, B. Truffer, Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 41(6), 955–967 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    F.W. Geels, Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: refining the coevolutionary multi-level perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 72, 681–696 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    F.W. Geels, The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: responses to seven criticisms. Environ. Innov. Societal Transitions 1(1), 24–40 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Jacobsson, A. Bergek, Innovation system analyses and sustainability transitions. Environ. Innov. Societal Transitions 1(1), 41–57 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    B. Carlsson, R. Stankiewicz, On the nature, function and composition of technological systems. J. Evol. Econ. 1(2), 93–118 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Schot, F.W. Geels, Strategic Niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manage. 20(5), 537–554 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Klinski, T.F. Berg, M. Maltha, S. Mellegård, T. Kristjansdottir, M. Berge, S.Holøs, T.H. Dokka, Systematisering av erfaringer med passivhus – oppfølging. Sintef. Oslo (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. Müller, T. Berker, Passive house at the crossroads: the past and the present of a voluntary standard. Energy Policy 60, 586–593 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Nykamp, A transition to green buildings in Norway. Environ. Innov. Societal Transitions 24, 83–93 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Koch, The design, build and operation of the new A-wing of University Hospital North Norway Tromsø. Case report in the BISI project (Building Information Standards and Innovation). Chalmers University of Technology. Gothenburg (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    O. Iglebæk, Utfordringer ved passivhus. (2008)
  14. 14.
    T. Dokka, I. Andresen, in Passive Houses in Cold Norwegian Climate, Paper at the 10th International Passive House Conference, Hannover (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    I. Dokka, T. Andresen, in New Norwegian Standard for Low Energy and Passive Houses. Proceedings 1st Nordic Conference on Passive Houses. Trondheim (2008), pp. 240–247Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    B.J. Wachenfeldt, I. Sartori, in Midt-Norge som pilotregion for passivhus satsing: Potensialstudie. Passivhouse Norden Conference Proceedings. Trondheim (2008), pp. 82–92Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Enova: Enovas homepage; (2017)
  18. 18.
    N. Christiansen, M. Kaltschmitt, F. Dzukowski, F. Isensee, Electricity consumption of medical plug loads in hospital laboratories: identification, evaluation, prediction and verification. Energy Build. 107, 392–406 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    U. Janson, Passive houses in Sweden. Experiences from design and construction phase (Lund University, Lund, 2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Buser, C. Koch, Multiple institutional dynamics of sustainable housing concepts in Denmark—on the role of passive houses. Sociol. Study 2(10), 725–741 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Construction ManagementChalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations