Salah Eldeen Ismaeel Elsayed Ahmed, Walaa (2014) Developing a systemic framework for applying LEED system: Managing energy and materials credits. PhD thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Italy.
Abstract
LEED system is one of the mostly diffused Green Building Rating systems, yet there is no defined framework on how to apply LEED system along the building process- as a Mean Not as an End itself. Hence, the research defines and develops the scopes and limits of operation of the LEED system establishing a proposed systemic framework for practitioners to apply LEED through an integrated process as well as individual practices- focusing on environmental considerations. The proposed framework is based on differentiating between two interrelated mechanisms of operation of Green Building Rating systems; 'Rating' and 'Certification' mechanisms; the Rating Mechanism, which includes acting as a (Guideline and Decision making support tool) covers organizational and operational aspects to achieve sustainable building process and as a (Measurement and Benchmarking tool) to assess sustainable building performance. Then, it discusses LEED system's verification and certification mechanism, which includes quality assurance methods provided by the system to verify sustainable building performance, e.g. Commissioning, Measurement and Verification, Post Occupancy Evaluation and Life Cycle Assessment- providing for the quality, which factors in the system's certification and market performance, hence determines the value and sets the price of LEED certified projects. Each scope represents a distinct role played by LEED system in the building process, and the contribution of each scope is what constitutes the whole system thinking. All four scopes should be applied in a systemic iterative manner within the correct timeframe, to support the decision making process and reach optimized management process. The framework was applied on both energy and materials credits- which represent almost half the total weight assigned for LEED credits and main source of criticism for the system. The research applies the proposed systemic framework along different project stages, to present a 'Know how' for practitioners. Then the research tests and validates the proposed framework for some of the Materials and Resources and Energy and Atmosphere credits, using two case studies: one is a new construction project (Science Museum in Trento), and the other is a major renovation project (Palazzo Ricordi Berchet) to explore the effect of using the suggested framework on different building types and contexts, as well as using different LEED rating systems and versions on the management process. Then a final step of adjustments is presented for the proposed research framework based on findings from the testing step.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Moschini, Paola |
| Index terms: | building process, renovation, green building, commissioning, benchmarking, case study, post-occupancy evaluation, sustainable building, decision-making process, science, construction project, life cycle assessment, practitioner, testing, decision-making, quality assurance, certification |
| Subjects: | design practice, completion, professional practice, decision analysis, environmental impact, production management, renovation and retrofit, practitioner, data collection methods, sustainable construction, building construction, evaluation methods, quality assurance, specialized education, administrative processes, performance measurement |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Research Practice, Education, Contract Administration, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Quality Management, Site Management, Project 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