Goh, B H and Sun, Y (2016) The development of life-cycle costing for buildings. Building Research & Information, 44(3), pp. 319-333. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The history of the application of life-cycle costing (LCC) began in the UK in the late 1950s and, until now, the state of its development as a concept is not clear. A literature review is presented that shows the changing approaches to LCC by drawing on four major academic journals and 45 peer-reviewed papers. The review verifies that there is a revival of interest in using LCC in tandem with other life-cycle methodologies for research on sustainable building. It also presents a set of methods that are applicable to model and estimate the life-cycle costs of 'conventional' and 'green' buildings with the objective of distinguishing them. Through the information gathered, it provides a centralized source of reference for the assumptions used in LCC calculations concerning some key input parameters. The finding shows an increasing trend of publications on the evaluation of economic options for green building designs and performance. The directions are clear that the concepts and methods have to evolve to a state where they will help to integrate and optimize economic, social and environmental considerations to deliver more sustainable built environments in the future.; The history of the application of life-cycle costing (LCC) began in the UK in the late 1950s and, until now, the state of its development as a concept is not clear. A literature review is presented that shows the changing approaches to LCC by drawing on four major academic journals and 45 peer-reviewed papers. The review verifies that there is a revival of interest in using LCC in tandem with other life-cycle methodologies for research on sustainable building. It also presents a set of methods that are applicable to model and estimate the life-cycle costs of 'conventional' and 'green' buildings with the objective of distinguishing them. Through the information gathered, it provides a centralized source of reference for the assumptions used in LCC calculations concerning some key input parameters. The finding shows an increasing trend of publications on the evaluation of economic options for green building designs and performance. The directions are clear that the concepts and methods have to evolve to a state where they will help to integrate and optimize economic, social and environmental considerations to deliver more sustainable built environments in the future.;
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | whole-life costs; sustainable buildings; capital cost; running cost; green building; value creation; life-cycle costing; buildings; life cycles |
| Index terms: | estimate, history, costing, option, publication, sustainable building, methodology, running cost, value creation, built environment, green building, life cycle, drawing, literature review, journal, capital cost |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, decision analysis, sustainable construction, economic development, design practice, research methods, accounting and finance, data analysis and analytics, architectural and construction history, financial and cost management, technical documentation, value management, research dissemination and communication |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Sustainability, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Information Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Urban Studies, 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