Quigley, D; Perara, S and Heaney, G (2007) Identifying the optimum balance across capital, life-cycle and environmental costs in new build construction projects. In: Boyd, D (ed.) Proceedings of 23rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2007, Belfast, UK.
Abstract
The costs associated with buildings are many and varied and reflect the impact buildings have on their owners, users, the environment in which they are set and the environment from which the resources employed in their construction and maintenance come. If the costs associated with construction projects are to be evaluated successfully, a full understanding of these costs and how they interact and influence each other is necessary. This paper introduces a research initiative, which aims to develop a methodology to identify the optimum balance across the various costs when procuring new build construction projects. Literature reviewed identifies the costs associated with buildings. Methods used to evaluate these costs, categorising them into capital costs, life-cycle costs and environmental costs, are discussed. The paper considers the interaction of the different cost categories and the potential of a benchmark reflecting a clear understanding of the interaction between the different cost categories, which could be set as a standard to be attained in building projects.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | benchmarking costs; building costs; full building costs; optimum balance |
| Index terms: | benchmarking, interaction, methodology, construction project, new build, owner, capital cost |
| Subjects: | production management, performance measurement, accounting and finance, research methods, construction integration, behavioral psychology, sociology |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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