Ändra sökning
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Environmental Assessment Tools for Neighbourhoods and Buildings in relation to Environment, Architecture, and Architects
KTH, Skolan för arkitektur och samhällsbyggnad (ABE), Hållbar utveckling, miljövetenskap och teknik, Miljöstrategisk analys (fms). University of Gävle.
2016 (Engelska)Doktorsavhandling, sammanläggning (Övrigt vetenskapligt)
Abstract [en]

This thesis explores Neighbourhood and Building Environmental Assessment Tools’ (NBEATs’) function as assessment tools and decision support, and their relation to environment, architecture and architects. This is done by analysing, testing, and discussing a number of NBEATs (LEED-NC, Code for Sustainable Homes, EcoEffect, LEED-ND, BREEAM-C, and ENSLIC-tool), their manuals and use. Moreover, professionals’ (architects’) self-rated opinions regarding use and knowledge of NBEATs and environmental aspects are surveyed.

Similarities and differences in NBEATs are found regarding: content, structure, weighting and indicators used. Indicators distinguished as procedure, performance and feature are used to varying extents to assess social, environmental and technical aspects. NBEATs relation to environmental sustainability has limitations due to: non-transparency, tradable indicators, relative measures, low criteria levels, limited life cycle perspective, and exclusion of relevant environmental aspects, such as embedded toxic substances, nutrient cycles, land use change, and ecosystem services. Ratings and architecture are influenced by NBEATs in varying ways. Higher criteria levels would probably increase their impact on architecture. Thus more research regarding NBEATs and links to architectural design, theory and practice is welcomed.

There is limited use of NBEATs as decision support in early design phases such as in architectural competitions. Architects rate the importance of environmental aspects high, but few rate their skill in handling environmental aspects high. This calls for increasing knowledge and know-how of environmental strategies and solutions among architects and adaptation of NBEATs to early design processes. The values NBEATs reflect and the values we want them to create is also important. To support ‘environmental’ architecture, an increased socio-eco-technological system perspective is put forward, and other measures besides NBEATs are needed.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
Stockholm: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2016. , s. 112
Serie
TRITA-INFRA-FMS-PHD
Nyckelord [en]
architects, architecture, buildings, environment, environmental assessment tools, environmental sustainability, neighbourhoods
Nationell ämneskategori
Teknik och teknologier
Forskningsämne
Planering och beslutsanalys
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-192939ISBN: 978-91-7729-123-7 (tryckt)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-192939DiVA, id: diva2:973924
Disputation
2016-10-21, Kollegiesalen, Brinellvägen 8, KTH, Stockholm, 09:30 (Engelska)
Opponent
Handledare
Anmärkning

QC 20160926

Tillgänglig från: 2016-09-26 Skapad: 2016-09-23 Senast uppdaterad: 2017-03-07Bibliografiskt granskad
Delarbeten
1. Framework for Detailed Comparison of Building Environmental Assessment Tools
Öppna denna publikation i ny flik eller fönster >>Framework for Detailed Comparison of Building Environmental Assessment Tools
2013 (Engelska)Ingår i: Buildings, ISSN 2075-5309, E-ISSN 2075-5309, Vol. 3, nr 1, s. 39-60Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

Understanding how Building Environmental Assessments Tools (BEATs) measure and define “environmental” building is of great interest to many stakeholders, but it is difficult to understand how BEATs relate to each other, as well as to make detailed and systematic tool comparisons. A framework for comparing BEATs is presented in the following which facilitates an understanding and comparison of similarities and differences in terms of structure, content, aggregation, and scope. The framework was tested by comparing three distinctly different assessment tools; LEED-NC v3, Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH), and EcoEffect. Illustrations of the hierarchical structure of the tools gave a clear overview of their structural differences. When using the framework, the analysis showed that all three tools treat issues related to the main assessment categories: Energy and Pollution, Indoor Environment, and Materials and Waste. However, the environmental issues addressed, and the parameters defining the object of study, differ and, subsequently, so do rating, results, categories, issues, input data, aggregation methodology, and weighting. This means that BEATs measure “environmental” building differently and push “environmental” design in different directions. Therefore, tool comparisons are important, and the framework can be used to make these comparisons in a more detailed and systematic way.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
Basel, Switzerland: MDPI AG, 2013
Nyckelord
framework, green building design, sustainable building, environmental assessment tool, LEED, code for sustainable homes, ecoeffect
Nationell ämneskategori
Miljöanalys och bygginformationsteknik Arkitekturteknik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-192938 (URN)10.3390/buildings3010039 (DOI)2-s2.0-84992234689 (Scopus ID)
Anmärkning

QC 20160929

Tillgänglig från: 2013-02-26 Skapad: 2016-09-23 Senast uppdaterad: 2017-11-21Bibliografiskt granskad
2. Design consequences of differences in building assessment tools: a case study
Öppna denna publikation i ny flik eller fönster >>Design consequences of differences in building assessment tools: a case study
2011 (Engelska)Ingår i: Building Research & Information, ISSN 0961-3218, E-ISSN 1466-4321, Vol. 39, nr 1, s. 16-33Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

Environmental assessment tools for buildings are emerging rapidly in many countries. Do different assessment tools influence the design process and also guide 'green' building projects in different directions? Three assessment tools, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for New Construction (LEED-NC), Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) and EcoEffect, were tested in a case study project in Sweden: a new multi-storey residential building called Gronskar. The content and results of the three assessment tools were compared in general, while issues in the three core common categories of Energy, Indoor Environment and Materials Waste were compared in more detail. The assessment results for the case study building varied with the three tools, and the design strategies and tactics to improve the overall rating of the building project differed for each tool. This confirms that the tools can influence sustainable building in different directions and illustrates insufficient consensus between assessment tools in terms of issues, criteria and weighting. The divergent results highlight the need for an appropriate structure of assessment tools that are both environmentally relevant and practically useful. 'on assiste dans de nombreux pays a l'emergence rapide d'outils d'evaluation environnementale. Des outils d'evaluation differents influent-ils sur le processus de conception et orientent-ils egalement les projets de batiments << verts >> dans des directions differentes? Trois outils d'evaluation, le systeme Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for New Construction (LEED-NC pour les constructions neuves), le Code for Sustainable Homes (Code pour des Logements Durables - CGH) et EcoEffect, ont ete testes dans le cadre d'un projet de construction situe en Suede et utilise comme etude de cas : un nouvel immeuble residentiel a etages multiples denomme Gronskar. Le contenu et les resultats de ces trois outils d'evaluation ont ete compares sur un plan general, tandis que les points relevant des trois principales categories communes - Energie, Environnement Interieur et Materiaux et Dechets - ont ete compares de maniere plus detaillee. Concernant l'immeuble utilise comme etude de cas, les trois outils ont donne des resultats d'evaluation qui differaient, et les strategies et tactiques de conception visant a ameliorer la notation globale du projet de construction etaient differentes pour chaque outil. Ceci confirme que ces outils peuvent influer sur un batiment durable a differents niveaux et illustre le consensus insuffisant entre les outils d'evaluation en termes d'enjeux, de criteres et de ponderation. Ces resultats divergents soulignent la necessite de pouvoir disposer d'outils d'evaluation presentant une structure adaptee pour que ceux-ci soient a la fois pertinents pour l'environnement et d'une utilite pratique. Mots cles: methodes d'evaluation, outil d'evaluation, evaluation des batiments, conception des batiments, Code for Sustainable Homes (Code pour des Logements Durables - CSH), EcoEffect, evaluation environnementale, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), batiment durable.

Nyckelord
assessment methods, assessment tool, building assessment, building design, Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH), EcoEffect, environmental assessment, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), sustainable building
Nationell ämneskategori
Arkitekturteknik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-26332 (URN)10.1080/09613218.2010.513210 (DOI)000286821500002 ()2-s2.0-78650728649 (Scopus ID)
Anmärkning
QC 20101123 Uppdaterad från accepted till published (20110315).Tillgänglig från: 2010-11-23 Skapad: 2010-11-23 Senast uppdaterad: 2017-12-12Bibliografiskt granskad
3. Basic building life cycle calculations to decrease contribution to climate change: Case study on an office building in Sweden
Öppna denna publikation i ny flik eller fönster >>Basic building life cycle calculations to decrease contribution to climate change: Case study on an office building in Sweden
2011 (Engelska)Ingår i: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 46, nr 10, s. 1863-1871Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

This study examined whether simplified life cycle-based calculations of climate change contributions can provide better decision support for building design. Contributions to climate change from a newly built office building in Gavle, Sweden, were studied from a life cycle perspective as a basis for improvements. A basic climate and energy calculation tool for buildings developed in the European project ENSLIC was used. The study also examined the relative impacts from building material production and building operation, as well as the relative importance of the impact contributions from these two life cycle stages at various conditions. The ENSLIC tool calculates operational energy use and contributions to climate change of a number of optional improvement measures. Twelve relevant improvement measures were tested. The most important measures proved to be changing to CO2 free electricity, changing construction slabs from concrete to wood, using windows with better U-values, insulating the building better and installing low-energy lighting and white goods. Introduction of these measures was estimated to reduce the total contribution to climate change by nearly 50% compared with the original building and the operational energy use by nearly 20% (from 100 to 81 kWh/m(2) yr). Almost every building is unique and situated in a specific context. Making simple analyses of different construction options showed to be useful and gave some unexpected results which were difficult to foresee from a general design experience. This process acts as an introduction to life cycle thinking and highlights the consequence of different material choices

Nyckelord
Building design, Climate change, CO(2) emissions, Life cycle tool, Energy use, Materials impact
Nationell ämneskategori
Husbyggnad Annan naturresursteknik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-36877 (URN)10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.02.003 (DOI)000292223900001 ()2-s2.0-79956355058 (Scopus ID)
Anmärkning
QC 20110721Tillgänglig från: 2011-07-21 Skapad: 2011-07-18 Senast uppdaterad: 2017-12-08Bibliografiskt granskad
4. Certification systems for sustainable neighbourhoods: What do they really certify?
Öppna denna publikation i ny flik eller fönster >>Certification systems for sustainable neighbourhoods: What do they really certify?
2016 (Engelska)Ingår i: Environmental impact assessment review, ISSN 0195-9255, E-ISSN 1873-6432, Vol. 56, s. 200-213Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

Certification systems for sustainable neighbourhoods started to emerge around a decade ago. This study analysed the content, structure, weighting and indicators of two established certification systems for sustainable urban development - BREEAM Communities and LEED for Neighborhood Development. Several limitations of these systems were identified: both have a bias for procedure and feature indicators over indicators that assess actual performance; performance demands are set according to a relative understanding of sustainable development; the focus is on internal sustainability, while upstream and downstream impacts of construction are disregarded; the number and distribution of mandatory issues do not cover essential sustainability aspects; and the disproportionately large number of non-mandatory issues makes benchmarking difficult and signals that sustainability aspects are exchangeable. Altogether, this means that an area can be certified without being sustainable. Moreover, the lack of continuous development of certification requirements in the systems means that they risk exerting a conservative effect on urban development, rather than pushing it forward.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
Elsevier, 2016
Nyckelord
Assessment, BREEAM, Certification, Indicators, LEED, Sustainable neighbourhood, Sustainable urban development
Nationell ämneskategori
Miljöledning
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-181461 (URN)10.1016/j.eiar.2015.10.003 (DOI)000368044600020 ()2-s2.0-84946600419 (Scopus ID)
Anmärkning

QC 20160203

Tillgänglig från: 2016-02-03 Skapad: 2016-02-02 Senast uppdaterad: 2017-11-30Bibliografiskt granskad
5. Professionals’ knowledge and use of environmental assessment in an architectural competition
Öppna denna publikation i ny flik eller fönster >>Professionals’ knowledge and use of environmental assessment in an architectural competition
2016 (Engelska)Ingår i: Building Research & Information, ISSN 0961-3218, E-ISSN 1466-4321, s. 1-17Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

In early design phases, architects, landscape architects and urban planners are key actors whose decisions determine the environmental impact of planning and building projects. Environmental and sustainability assessment tools for buildings and neighbourhoods have been developed to promote sustainable building, but their usage has not been thoroughly evaluated. This study investigated self-reported knowledge and usage of such tools among competitors and jury group from 10 European countries involved in the international architectural competition ‘A New City Centre for Kiruna’ in Sweden. The questionnaire revealed that 13% used environmental assessment tools or management systems in the competition, although 47% had used them previously. Tool users reported greater knowledge of how to handle environmental impacts than non-users. However, the self-rated experience of handling various environmental impacts, in the competition and in general, was low for both groups. Nevertheless, the self-rated importance of environmental impacts was high among all participants. Based on this study, it is concluded that environmental assessment tools, issues and goals can be better integrated into the processes of early design in planning and building projects, and in architectural competitions. Furthermore, to limit environmental impacts in building and planning projects, professionals need to be educated about environmental strategies and solutions.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
Routledge, 2016
Nyckelord
architects, architectural competition, assessment tool, environmental assessment, knowledge, neighbourhood, sustainable design, urban design
Nationell ämneskategori
Arkitekturteknik
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-187274 (URN)10.1080/09613218.2015.1118264 (DOI)000399461700006 ()2-s2.0-84961214754 (Scopus ID)
Anmärkning

QP 201605

QC 20170602

Tillgänglig från: 2016-05-19 Skapad: 2016-05-19 Senast uppdaterad: 2017-06-02Bibliografiskt granskad

Open Access i DiVA

Wallhagen 2016 PhD Thesis(2601 kB)544 nedladdningar
Filinformation
Filnamn FULLTEXT01.pdfFilstorlek 2601 kBChecksumma SHA-512
19382cef6eb6d64a25770a765a9e698c6e85ec48e1bf7db07ba2cf57e253106db13987457e96e54433ebc19204d5dacbccc00ce43c9b8abd3b1311e48f0a1037
Typ fulltextMimetyp application/pdf

Sök vidare i DiVA

Av författaren/redaktören
Wallhagen, Marita
Av organisationen
Miljöstrategisk analys (fms)
Teknik och teknologier

Sök vidare utanför DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Totalt: 544 nedladdningar
Antalet nedladdningar är summan av nedladdningar för alla fulltexter. Det kan inkludera t.ex tidigare versioner som nu inte längre är tillgängliga.

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetricpoäng

isbn
urn-nbn
Totalt: 2187 träffar
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf