Wong, P S P; Holdsworth, S; Crameri, L and Lindsay, A (2019) Does carbon accounting have an impact on decision-making in building design? International Journal of Construction Management, 19(2), pp. 149-161. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Carbon accounting allows for an estimation of the embodied carbon amount associated with the construction stage of project development. However, in Australia such practice is not mandatory. This research investigates if carbon accounting can affect decisions in building design. Semi-structured interviews of project managers were conducted in Melbourne, Australia. While respondents showed good understanding of energy efficiency and life-cycle costing, they appeared to have misconceptions about carbon accounting. The results of this study reveal more energy efficient building may also be more embodied carbon consuming to construct. Interviewees recognized a need for carbon accounting and suggested this would improve the scientific credibility of decision-making in building designs. However, unless required by the government regulations, carbon accounting may not attract the attention that may help drive better decisions in building designs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | carbon accounting; energy efficiency; project design decision |
| Index terms: | project development, costing, energy-efficient building, estimation, Australia, project design, government regulation, project manager, building design, energy efficiency, accounting, decision-making, embodied carbon, interview |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, sustainable design, Geography, health safety and environment, accounting and finance, contractual arrangements, financial and cost management, project delivery, architectural design, economic analysis, sustainability and energy, environmental impact, data collection methods, profession |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here