Cole, R J and Sterner, E (2000) Reconciling theory and practice of life-cycle costing. Building Research & Information, 28(5-6), pp. 368-375. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The notion of Life-Cycle Costing (LCC) is generally recognized as a valuable approach for comparing alternative building designs - enabling operational cost benefits to be evaluated against any initial cost increases. However, a host of practical difficulties conspire to limit its widespread adoption. This limited acceptance is particularly important in green building where many of the benefits of strategic choices can often only be understood and justified when cast in a life-cycle context. This paper identifies some of the critical gaps between the theory (and promise) and practice of Life-Cycle Cost analysis to discover strategies that encourage greater use.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building design; economics; finance; green building; life-cycle cost; practice; procurement; risk assessment; whole life costs |
| Index terms: | costing, green building, risk assessment, cost increase, whole life cost, strategy, building design, cost analysis |
| Subjects: | financial risk, design practice, management, economics, accounting and finance, financial analysis, financial and cost management, architectural design |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy |
| 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