Dynamic relationship between embodied and operational impacts of buildings. An evaluation of sustainable design appraisal tools
| Published date | 01 April 2019 |
| Date | 01 April 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/WJSTSD-05-2018-0048 |
| Pages | 70-81 |
| Author | Saheed O. Ajayi,Lukumon O. Oyedele,Jamiu A. Dauda |
| Subject Matter | Public policy & environmental management,Environmental technology & innovation |
Dynamic relationship between
embodied and operational
impacts of buildings
An evaluation of sustainable design
appraisal tools
Saheed O. Ajayi
School of Built Environment and Engineering,
Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK
Lukumon O. Oyedele
Bristol Enterprise, Research and Innovation Centre (BERIC),
University of West of England, Bristol, UK, and
Jamiu A. Dauda
School of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Abstract
Purpose –Buildings and their construction activities consume a significant proportion of mineral resources
excavated from nature and contribute a large percentage of CO
2
in the atmosphere. As a way of improving the
sustainability of building construction and operation, various sustainable design appraisal standards have
been developed across nations. Albeit criticism of the appraisal standards, evidence shows that increasing
sustainability of the built environment has been engendered by such appraisal tools as Building Research
Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), Code for Sustainable Homes (CfSH),
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design and Comprehensive Assessment System for Built
Environment Efficacy, among others. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of the
appraisal standards in engendering whole lifecycle environmental sustainability of the built environment.
Design/methodology/approach –In order to evaluate the adequacy of sustainability scores assigned to
various lifecycle stages of buildings in the appraisal standards, four case studies of a block of classroom were
modelled. Using Revit as a modelling platform, stage by stage lifecycle environmental impacts of the building
were simulated through Green Building Studio and ATHENA Impact estimator. The resulting environmental
impacts were then compared against the assessment score associated with each stage of building lifecycle in
BREAAM and CfSH.
Findings –Results show that albeit the consensus that the appraisal standards engender sustainability
practices in the AEC industry, total scores assigned to impacts at each stage of building lifecycle is
disproportionate to thesimulated whole-lifeenvironmental impactsassociated withthe stages in some instances.
Originality/value –As the study reveals both strengths and weaknesses in the existing sustainability
appraisal standards, measures through which they can be tailored to resource efficiency and lifecycle
environmental sustainability of the built environment are suggested.
Keywords Sustainability, Construction, Circular economy
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
In addition to its consumption of largest proportion of mineral resources excavated from
nature (Anink et al., 1996), building and construction activities contribute large percentageof
CO
2
in the atmosphere (Baek et al., 2013), and produce the largest portion of waste to landfill
(Oyedele et al., 2014). Due to this, it has often been argued that the sustainability of the built
environment is indispensable to achieving the global sustainability agenda (Anderson and
Thornback, 2012). Since the initiation of official movement for sustainability was raised
through Brundtland Report, concernsraised by the awareness of climate change has become
World Journal of Science,
Technology and Sustainable
Development
Vol. 16 No. 2, 2019
pp. 70-81
© Emerald PublishingLimited
2042-5945
DOI 10.1108/WJSTSD-05-2018-0048
Received 29 May 2018
Revised 23 October 2018
Accepted 6 December 2018
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2042-5945.htm
70
WJSTSD
16,2
To continue reading
Request your trial