Malmqvist, T and Glaumann, M (2006) Selecting problem-related environmental indicators for housing management. Building Research & Information, 34(4), pp. 321-333. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The performance of environmental management systems is difficult to evaluate due to insufficient methods for measuring their environmental impacts. A procedure is proposed that contains more environmentally relevant indicators for assessing environmental impacts. In addition, theoretical and practical criteria are suggested for evaluating the relevance of different indicators. This scheme was applied to the housing-management sector with the aim of finding more problem-related indicators. Data from three existing Swedish housing estates were collected and indicators calculated for three environmental aspects: energy use, household waste treatment and embedded toxic substances/materials. The results show that problem-related environmental indicators can be used in the housing sector to measure energy consumption and, to a certain extent, household waste treatment. Finding indicators for embedded toxic substances was found to be more problematic, but an example for further discussion is presented.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building stock; environmental impacts; environmental indicators; environmental management system; facility management; housing; Sweden |
| Index terms: | housing estate, environmental management system, Sweden, housing management, building stock, environmental impact, energy consumption, household, housing, energy use |
| Subjects: | construction type, environmental impact, control systems, real estate economics, energy systems, economic development, Geography, demography, asset management |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Geographical Context, 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