A comparative analysis of sustainable building assessment methods. (August 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Díaz López, Carmen; Carpio, Manuel; Martín-Morales, Maria; Zamorano, Montserrat
• Is Part Of: Sustainable cities and society. Volume 49(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-08
• Subjects: Sustainable building -- Level(s) -- Systems -- Standards -- Tools -- Sustainable building assessment methods; Sustainable urban development -- Periodicals; Sustainable buildings -- Periodicals; Urban ecology (Sociology) -- Periodicals; 307.76
• DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2019.101611
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2210-6707

Abstract

Highlights: The prevailing building sustainability assessment methods were reviewed. Different methods were divided into groups. Each groups of methods and Level(s) was studied. Level(s), currently in the testing phase, is the most complete method identified in this study. Abstract: Since the advent of the first sustainability assessment method, TRYNNS, a large number of widely differing methods have been developed to assess, rate and certify the sustainability of different types of buildings. This study sets out to review, identify, classify and compare today's main assessment methods by analysing their characteristics, structure, scope of application and approach. As a result, 101 current methods have been identified and assigned to 3 groups: systems, standards and tools, plus a recently approved instrument called Level(s). The 36 most representative methods identified have been selected, and have been compared using 4 variables: phase of life cycle applied; sustainability aspects assessed; categories considered; and the type and status of the project assessed. The results have shown that each of the methods separately does not assess all aspects of a sustainable building. Many assess energy and the quality of the interior environment, while few assess more recent social and economic aspects. The considerable number of methods considered and the in-depth analysis performed in this study give extremely valuable insight into the existing evaluation framework, and allows agents to select the method that best responds to their needs.