Road Map and Principles for Built Environment Sustainability

Abstract

The built environment, defined by the facilities and civil infrastructure systems that people use, is the fundamental foundation upon which a society exists, develops, and survives. As the main provider and the life cycle custodian of the built environment, the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry plays a critical role in determining the quality, integrity, and longevity of this foundation. In the execution of these two roles, provider and custodian, the AEC industry has had a major direct and indirect impact on the natural environment, contributing both directly and indirectly to natural resource depletion and degradation, waste generation and accumulation, and environmental impact and degradation. These impacts are not unique to the AEC industry. Other industries face similar challenges, and for many years, a wide range of constituencies within them have been attempting the implementation of the concept of sustainability within what these industries do, how they do it, and with what as a possible mechanism to slow, reduce, eliminate these impacts, and even restore conditions to a better state. In the pursuit of sustainability, the AEC industry faces challenges posed by the unique attributes and characteristics nature of facilities and civil infrastructure systems, the complexities of the current processes for their delivery and use, and the diverse set of resources required for both their delivery and their use. This paper offers a road map and an initial set of principles to implement built environment sustainability as a starting point for an ongoing, industry-wide dialogue and debate.

Contemporary Issues in Building Collapse and Its Implications for Sustainable Development

“…Thus to accomplish high-performance, low-environmental-impact buildings, it is vital to incorporate sustainable principles from the onset of any project [7]. Venegas [19] identified five key elements of built environmental sustainability to include the people, industrial base, resource base, natural environment, and the built environment. However Sev [7] noted that sustainable construction can be differentiated according to the three dimensions of sustainable development (environmental, social and economic) and must rely on three basic principles namely:…”

“…The use of flexible and durable designs to support future changes (cost-effectively and resource-efficiently), and the selection of sustainable materials and products that meet defined standards of compliance [22], contribute to sustainability. The sustainable design element of a building's life-cycle affords significant opportunities for influencing project sustainability before construction operations begin on site [19]. During construction, proper planning and management of construction activities could be used to minimize site impact on the environment [7].…”

“…Five elements of the principles of sustainable development that are advocated [7,19,22] and which will be explored further in this paper include: the selection of durable and sustainable materials that meet defined standards of compliance; appropriate site selection; use of flexible and durable designs; proper planning and management of construction activities; and proper commissioning of building systems and equipment before occupation.…”

“…From the foregoing it can be inferred that current building construction practices are not sustainable and do not conform to basic elements of sustainable principles advocated by Sev [7], Vanegas [19] and Redclift [22]. Sustainable building principles advocate the use of durable and sustainable materials, which has not seemed to be the case in buildings constructed in Nigeria.…”

Sustainability and investment appraisal for housing regeneration projects

“…The natural environment was recognised as a fundamental support system for economic and social development, which sparked the exponential growth of both sustainability indicators and composite methodologies, including the 600 identified by Horner (2004) and Levitt-Therivel (2004). Vanegas (2003) espouses that this continuous development of new, predominantly anthropocentric, sustainability appraisal methodologies resulted in a collection of frameworks providing such varied views of sustainability that they conflicted with each other and so were of little use. Due to this, and other limitations such as their practical inapplicability and incompleteness, Horner (2004) and Levitt-Therivel (2004) concluded that only 103 of the identified 600 methodologies were usable, and Turcu (2013) espoused that only six could realistically be applied in a social housing context.…”