Poston, A; Emmanuel, R and Thomson, C (2010) Developing holistic frameworks for the next generation of sustainability assessment methods for the built environment. In: Egbu, C (ed.) Proceedings of 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
It is essential for any development within the built environment aspiring to deliver a high degree of sustainability to consider the contribution that it will make to the local culture, place and systems; and the impacts of these on the wider region. In order to achieve this, a number of key issues need to be considered within the context of the entire life-cycle of a building. Current Sustainability Assessment Methods (SAMs) in the built environment are principally focused on the projected energy consumption and environmental impacts of new-build projects; tending to focus on assessment during design and construction phases, prior to the occupation of the building. A number of novel articulations of sustainable development have recently been expressed through holistic design theory and frameworks such as 'One Planet Living', emphasizing the need for a more holistic view to be adopted within the built environment. This paper presents the findings of an evaluation of current SAMs practice and novel articulations of sustainable development in order to identify a set of key factors required to develop a holistic framework. It explores the key social, economic and environmental factors that need to be taken into account and the requirements for future longevity and contribution to these areas. Further understanding is required of the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to sustainability to enable key areas of focus to be established for the development of the next generation of SAM’s and related policy on sustainability.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; life-cycle; sustainability; triple bottom line |
| Index terms: | sustainability assessment, sustainable development, occupation, built environment, design and construction, environmental impact, energy consumption, environmental factor |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, energy systems, environmental science, environmental impact, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, sustainability assessment, health safety and environment |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Procurement, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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