Dammann, S and Elle, M (2006) Environmental indicators: Establishing a common language for green building. Building Research & Information, 34(4), pp. 387-404. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Environmental indicators for buildings have the potential to serve as a means of making the environmental impacts (and possibly benefits) of buildings visible to all relevant actors. In addition, indicators facilitate the consideration and management of an array of environmental issues in the relevant decision-making situations. The broad acceptance of indicators across different groups of decision-makers in different phases of a building's life cycle is especially important when indicators are not mandatory, but are to be used in voluntary bottom-up initiatives. The objective of the present study was to investigate if (and to what extent) a consensus on environmental indicators for buildings as 'a common language for green building can be reached among core actors in the Danish building sector and what such indicators could look like. Based on an analysis of current indicator systems and a qualitative investigation of the views of different actor groups on environmental indicators for buildings, the areas of consensus and lines of conflict between the actor groups were identified. Four different technological frames were used to identify four different perceptions of environmental indicators. Applying the theory of the social construction of technology (SCOT) in a prospective way, the findings show that a closure of the indicator-debate on the basis of an all-actors consensus within the near future is unlikely. Instead, three likely scenarios are described for the future development of the indicator debate and the directions for different actors are identified to create a common language for the use of green building indicators.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | consensus building; decision support systems; environmental indicators; green building; social construction of technology; sustainability assessment |
| Index terms: | investigation, green building, environmental impact, decision-making, social construction of technology, decision support, environmental issue, sustainability assessment, consensus building, life cycle |
| Subjects: | design practice, sustainability assessment, collaborative management, sociology, decision analysis, environmental issues, environmental impact, value management, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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