A Multidimensional and Participatory Approach for Green Buildings Assessment

1
A Multidimensional and Participatory Approach for
Green Buildings Assessment
2
Multidimensional valuation and decision making
processes
Introduction

• The development of complex decision making
  processes has encouraged the involvement of
  different stakeholders in the evaluation
  procedures and tools
• Multi-criteria evaluations are increasingly being
  used in deliberative evaluation processes,
  addressing research experiences and applications
  towards this new challenge to give broader and
  stronger meaning and consistency to the outcomes
  of decision making processes
• The need for evaluation tools aiding complex
  decisions comes from the consciousness about
  uncertainty that requires to focus more on the
  process than on the outcomes

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
3
Contents
Introduction

• Green Building Challenge (Gbc) sustainability
  valuation models
• evolution
• strenghts and weaknesses
• Theoretical principles of Multicriteria Decision
  Aid Analysis (Mcda)
• Review of SBTool Model
• Valuation process
• Analytical Framework
• Choice of criteria
• Weights assignment to the criteria
• Valuation as tool for supporting decision making
  processes

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
4
Theorethical principles of Mcda
Introduction

• Assumptions
• Increasing decisional complexity
• Increasing of conflicts in deliberation processes
• Tool for decision making processes
• Organizing available information
• Considering effects of actions
• Exploring stakeholders expectations
• Minimizing likelihood of disappointment
• Common features of methods and techniques
• Different options and valuation criteria
• Involvement of several stakeholder
• Considering uncertainty

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
5
The SBTool Model general features
The SBTool Model

• 6 excel file connected
• 3 levels of valuation
• Issues (1. Site selection, Project Planning
  Devel., 2. Energy Resources consumption, 3.
  Environmental Loadings, 4. Indoor Environmental
  Quality, 5. Quality of Service, 6. Social and
  economic aspects, 7. Cultural and Perceptual
  aspects)
• Categories
• Criteri a
• Range of score from -1 to 5
• -1 extremely negative performance
• 0 lowest acceptable performance level
• 3 good construction practice
• 5 best practice
• Involvement of different stakeholders in the
  decision making process
• Design team
• Evaluator
• Third subject

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
6
The SBTool Model selection and weights
assignment to the criteria
The SBTool Model

• The selection and the weights assignment is
  committed to a third subject (indipendent) in
  order to give transparency to the evaluation
  process
• Weights assignment is carried out in 2
  different ways
• ISSUES, CATEGORIES weights go from 1, that
  represents a low importance, to 5, except for
  issues and categories considered Mandatory. In
  these cases must be assigned weights higher than
  3. The default weighting system gives more
  importance to the environmental issues (Energy
  and Resources consumption, Environmental Loadings
  and Indoor Environmental Quality)
• CRITERIA a score from 1 to 3 is assigned to each
  criterion, referring to the extent (global or
  regional urban or neighborhood building or
  site), the intensity (strong or direct moderate
  or indirect weak) and the duration (gt50 years
  gt10 years lt10 years ) of potential effects on
  the environment.

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
7
Critical review of the valuation process
Critical Review of SBTool
STRENGHTS WEAKNESSES
Transparency Valuation is time-consuming
Involvement of different subjects There arent social and economical indicators about the context
Data are easy to plug in The role of Stakeholders in the valuation process is not active
Flexible use Data about environmental loadings are difficult to find
Its possible to fit the valuation model to different contexts
Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
8
Critical review of selection and weights
assignment to the criteria
Critical Review of SBTool
STRENGHTS WEAKNESSES
Involvement of experts Only the third subject has the task to assign the weights
Use of both quantitative and qualitative indicators Weights of criteria dont consider the socio-economic features of the context
Choice of criteria linked to the uses of building and the different phases of life cycle Stakeholders are not involved both in the choice and in the weights assignment of the criteria
Impacts of criteria on the context Reasons of selection and weights assigment of the criteria are not explicited
Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
9
Development of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA

• GENERAL GOALS
• To assess social and economic dimension of
  sustainability beside the environmental one
• To open the decision making process to a broader
  number of subjects by the active involvement in
  the evaluation process of
• Decisional Stakeholder (DS) subject committed to
  take final decisions
• Non Decisional Stakeholder (NDS) holders of
  interest without any decisional power on
  project/plan
• To find a balance between subjective aspects
  (preferences) and objective aspects (data about
  the context environmental, social and economic
  impacts)

To solve main weaknesses of the software
Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
10
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Development of SBTool
Actual version
THIRD SUBJECT
IMPACTS OF CRITERIA
Weights -criteria
Weights -criteria
CONTEXT
Local level
direct identification
preferences
Regional level
input of data
Introduction The SBTool Model
Crtitical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
11
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Development of SBTool/2
Variable subjectivity
New version
Constant objectivity
Variable objectivity
Introduction The SBTool Model
Crtitical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
12
Development of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA

• Use of different kind of analysis for selecting
  and weighting criteria
• Stakeholders analysis (Decisional Stakeholder,
  Non Decisional Stakeholder) Analysis of shared
  preferences
• Contexts analysis
• Analysis of impacts of criteria
• Weights assignment at different valuation
  levels
• Issues f(Preferences of all the stakeholders
  Contexts analysis)
• Categories f(Preferences of all the
  stakeholders)
• Criteria f(Preferences of Decisional
  Stakeholders Impacts of criteria)

Mixed use of objective and subjective data at key
levels of valuation (issues and criteria)
Introduction The SBTool Model
Crtitical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
13
Stakeholders Analysis
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Field of application Issues and categories

• All of the stakeholder involved both
  institutional and informal
• Decisional Stakeholder (DS), who has the task of
  final decision (generally Public Administration)
• Questionnaire
• Characters of the stakeholder
• Interest in the project
• Role in the design process
• Weights of criteria
• Role in the valuation process
• Capability of addressing vauation porcesses
• Level of cooperation or conflict with other
  stakeholders
• Resources

• Score from 0 to 3 to the question in red
• 5. Mean Index of influence
• Index of influence average of score assigned

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
14
Analysis of shared preferences
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Field of application Issues and categories

• To define the Homogeneity Index of Preferences
• Homogeneity Index (Oi) N NDS eliciting
  the most shared preferencel/ Tot N NDS
• For each criterion to balance the NDS
  preferences with the DS ones
• Weight of criterion NDS weight?(Oi?0,67)
  DS Weight?1-(Oi?0,67)
• where 0,67 is a reduction coefficient of the Oi
  in order to consider both the DS and the NDS
  preferences
• To distribute 50 scores among the issues and 100
  scores among the categories proportionally to the
  weight of the criterion in its own evaluation
  level

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
15
Report of NDS features
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
16
Preferences of all the stakeholders
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
17
Context analysis new socio-economic indicators
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Field of application Issues

• New socio-economic indicators
• Energy intensity
• Number of renewable energy system
• Crime rate
• Poverty range
• Family per capita Gross domestic product
• Families that state to have at least a problem
  in their house for 100 families
• Families average monthly expenses for furniture,
  household electrical appliances and house
  services
• House space
• Detailed framework of the possible connections
  between context indicators and evaluation
  criteria by an objective tree for each issues,
  according to the hierarchic structure of SBTool
  and calculation of criteria affected by each
  indicator for each issue (indicators incidence)

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
18
Context analysis operating steps
Addressing SBTool to MCDA

• Benchmarking of context indicators are used as
  benchmark performances for some values
• Value -1 negative performance
• Value 3 best practice
• Performances valuation of context indicators
• Results for per issues
• Vote for issue S(score of indicator i ?
  incidence of indicator i)
• Distribution of 50 scores to the issues in
  inverse relation to the level of contexts
  sustainability in order to give most importance
  to solving the criticisms of the context and to
  avoid to increase the existing imbalances of
  territorial development.

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
19
Impact analysis of criteria
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Field of application Criteria

• Valuation of impacts of criteria on the context
  ray of action (RA), intensity (INT), duration
  (D)
• RA proportionally to the territorial extension
• INT proportionally to indirect or direct effect
• D proportionally to the phases of life cycle
• Multiplication, for each criterion, of impact
  factors and definition of total impact index of
  criterion
• Global impact of the criterion (RA impact x
  INT impact x D impact)
• Distribution of 50 score among the criteria of
  the same category proportionally to the total
  impact index of each criterion

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
20
Impact analysis of criteria
Addressing SBTool to MCDA
Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
21
Report of weights
Addressing SBTool to MCDA

• ISSUES
• 50 scores from stakeholder s preferences
• 50 scores from contexts analysis
• CATEGORIES
• 100 scores from stakeholder s preferences
• CRITERIA
• 50 scores from DSs preferences
• 50 scores from impact analysis of criteria

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions
22
Results and further developments
Conclusions

• The process suggested to solve the current
  criticisms of SBTool is coherent with the
  purposes highlighted in the critical analysis of
  the evaluation model
• Quite attention has been paid to the integration
  between multicriteria analysis and participation
  methods, in order to strengthen the iterative and
  interactive nature of the appraisal process
• The final decisions are assumed consciously by
  the actors involved in the decision-making
  process for the opportunity of verifying the
  impacts of their choices according to the
  available information and their expectations into
  a transparent evaluation process
• The implemented tool could be considered as a
  kind of social decisional multicriteria analysis
  since it makes explicit, rational and efficient
  the selection between multiple and/or conflicting
  goals, contributing to improve the transparency
  and to strengthen the legitimacy of decisions
  taken

Introduction The SBTool Model
Critical Review of SBTool
Addressing SBTool to MCDA Conclusions