Analysis of sustainable building rating systems in relation to CEN/TC 350 standards
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.63707Keywords:
Sustainability building rating systems, sustainability indicators, standards CEN/TC 350Abstract
Numerous sustainability rating systems have been developed in the building sector. In this paper we distinguish between those whose aim is to allow companies striving for improved performance to gain an objective basis for communicating their efforts, such as LEED, and those that aim to communicate the life cycle environmental impact of goods, such as ATHENA Impact Estimator. We name the former effort-driven assessment and the latter data-driven assessment. This work undertakes a state-of-the-art review of all these assessment systems and assesses their effectiveness comparing the indicators used for assessment against the established standards by the Technical Committee (TC) 350 of the European Committee for standardization (CEN/TC 350). About 62% of the social and economic indicators remain unconsidered by the existing data-driven assessment tools, whereas effort-driven assessment tools have a higher consideration of social and economic aspects, with about half of the indicators unconsidered.
Downloads
References
(1) Haapio, A. & Viitaniemi, P. (2008). A critical review of building environmental assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28 (7): 469-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2008.01.002
(2) Chandratilake, S.R., & Dias, W.P.S. (2013). Sustainability rating systems for buildings: Comparisons and correlations. Energy, 59: 22-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.07.026
(3) Cole, R.J. (2005). Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and roles. Building Research & Information, 33(5): 455-467. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210500219063
(4) Nguyen, B.K. & Altan, H. (2011). Comparative review of five sustainable rating systems. Procedia Engineering, 21: 376-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2029
(5) Berardi, U. (2012). Sustainability assessment in the construction sector: rating systems and rated buildings. Sustainable Development, 20(6): 411-424. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.532
(6) Lee, W.L. (2012). Benchmarking energy use of building environmental assessment schemes. Energy and Buildings, 45: 326-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.11.024
(7) Sharifi, A. & Murayama, A. (2013). A critical review of seven selected neighborhood sustainability assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 38: 73-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2012.06.006
(8) Kajikawa, Y., Inoue, T. & Goh, T.N., (2011a). Analysis of building environment assessment frameworks and their implications for sustainability indicators. Sustainability Science, 6(2): 233-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0131-7
(9) World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987). Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future. pdf (accessed on 6 September 2016).
(10) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2010). Guidelines on Education Policy for Sustainable Build Environments. Retrieved from http://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/7997 (accessed on 6 September 2016).
(11) Gibson, R.B. (2006). Beyond the pillars: sustainability assessment as a framework for effective integration of social, economic and ecological considerations in significant decision-making. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 8(03): 259-280. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1464333206002517
(12) Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C.K. & Rangaswami, M.R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation. Harvard business review, 87(9): 56-64.
(13) Gibberd, J. (2005). Assessing sustainable buildings in developing countries - the sustainable building assessment tool (SBAT) and the sustainable building lifecycle (SBL). In Proceedings of the world sustainable building conference. (pp. 1605-1612). Tokyo.
(14) Hikmat, H. & Nsairat, S. (2009). Developing a green building assessment tool for developing countries Case of Jordan. Building and Environment, 44 (5): 1053-1064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.07.015
(15) Andreas, G., Allen, J. & Farley, L. (2010, March). Towards the Development of a Rating System for Sustainable Infrastructure: A Checklist or a Decision-Making Tool? In Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation, Cities of the Future/Urban River Restoration. (pp. 379-391). Boston, MA, USA. https://doi.org/10.2175/193864710798284643
(16) Huedo, P., Mulet, E. & López-Mesa, B. (2016). A model for the sustainable selection of building envelope assemblies. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 57: 63-77. PII: S0195-9255(15)00121-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2015.11.005
(17) Bare, J.C., Hofstetter, P., Pennington, D.W. & Udo de Haes H.A. (2000). Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5(6): 319-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978665
(18) Pieri, C., Dumanski, J., Hamblin A. & Young, A. (1995). Indicadores de Calidad de la tierra. Documentos de Discusión del Banco Mundial. Washington, DC: El Banco Mundial.
(19) Huedo, P. & Lopez-Mesa, B. (2011). Revisión de herramientas de asistencia en la selección de soluciones constructivas. Informes de la Construcción, 65(529): 77-88. https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.11.048
(20) Kajikawa, Y., Inoue, T. & Goh, T.N., (2011b). Analysis of building environment assessment frameworks and their implications for sustainability indicators. Sustainability Science, 6(2): 233-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0131-7
(21) Castro-Lacouture, D., Sefair, J.A., Flórez, L. & Medaglia, A.L. (2009). Optimization model for the selection of materials using a LEED-based green building rating system in Colombia. Building and Environment, 44(6): 1162-1170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.08.009
(22) France GBC & Alto Ingenierie (2015). International environmental certifications for the design and construction of non-residential buildings. The positioning of HQE certification relative to BREEAM and LEED.
(23) USGBC Green Building Council. Retrieved from http://www.usgbc.org/?CategoryID=19 [accessed 21.04.14].
(24) Mallawarachchi, H., De Silva, L., Rameezdeen, R. (2013). Green buildings, resilience ability and the challenge of disaster risk. International Conference on Building Resilience, September 2013, Ahungalla, Sri Lanka. Retrieved from https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/277892802_Green_buildings_resilience_ability_and_the_challenge_of_disaster_risk [accessed Mar 04 2018].
(25) Bernardi, E., Carlucci, S., Cornaro, C., Bohne , R.A. (2017). Analysis of the Most Adopted Rating Systems for Assessing the Environmental Impact of Buildings. Sustainability, 9(7): 1226. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071226
(26) HQE. Haute Qualitè Environnementale (2017). Retrieved from http://www.behqe.com [accessed on 26 June 2017].
(27) Cerway. HQE™ Management System for Urban Planning Projects. Requirements Scheme for the Management System of Urban Planning and Development Projects-HQE™ Certified by Cerway; Cerway: Paris, France, 2014. [Google Scholar]
(28) Garcia, J. & Macías, M. (2010). Metodología y herramienta VERDE para la evaluación de la sostenibilidad en edificios. Informes de la Construcción, 62(517): 87-100. https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.08.056
(29) Rodriguez-López, F. & Fernández-Sánchez, G. (2009). Sostenibilidad en los proyectos de construcción. Análisis de un edificio frente a dos herramientas de evaluación sostenible. In Proceedings of the XII Congreso de Ingeniería de Proyectos AEIPRO. Badajoz.
(30) Dodd, N., Cordella, M., Traverso, M., Donatello, S. (2017). Level(s) - A common EU framework of core sustainability indicators for office and residential buildings. European Commission, JRC technical reports.
(31) Rojo, M. (2014). Estudio de la implementación de sistemas de certificación sostenible en edificación. Aplicación de LEED en el Colegio CEIP PIO XII, de Onda Castellón. (Master's Degree Project). Castellón: Universitat Jaume I.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
