Bröchner, J; Ang, G K I and Fredriksson, G (1999) Sustainability and the performance concept: Encouraging innovative environmental technology in construction. Building Research & Information, 27(6), pp. 367-372. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Encouragement of innovation is a major reason for using the performance concept in construction regulations and specifications, mostly in the context of design-build contracts. Performance criteria aiming at sustainability emphasize long term behaviour of built facilities, which complicates the measurement of compliance. Strategies for identifying areas with strong promises of innovative technologies should be developed, so as to concentrate the efforts in developing performance requirements. The development of standardized consensus methods and procedures should be accelerated. Finally, it is suggested that good examples of how performance requirements can be expressed and monitored should be made globally available.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | innovation; life cycle assessment; performance specification; sustainability |
| Index terms: | performance criteria, encouragement, performance specification, regulation, life cycle assessment, compliance, strategy, specification |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, tendering, political science, contractual condition, health safety and environment, environmental impact, management |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Procurement, Human Resources, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Governance, Contract Administration |
| 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