IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2021i1p197-d711205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Methodological Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Construction Projects Incorporating TBL and Decoupling Principles

Author

Listed:
  • Shivam Srivastava

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India)

  • Usha Iyer Raniga

    (School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
    Sustainable Buildings and Construction Programme, Co-Lead United Nations One Planet Network, 75015 Paris, France)

  • Sudhir Misra

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India)

Abstract

The triple bottom line (TBL) principle encompasses the idea of continued economic and social well-being with minimal or reduced environmental pressure. However, in construction projects, the integration of social, economic, and environmental dimensions from the TBL perspective remains challenging. Green building rating tools/schemes, such as Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA), Leadership in Energy and Environment Design (LEED), Building Research Establishment Environment Assessment (BREEAM), and their criteria, which serve as a yardstick in ensuring sustainability based practices and outcomes, are also left wanting. These green building rating tools/schemes not only fail to comprehensively evaluate the three dimensions (social, economic, and environment) and interaction therewith, but also lack in capturing a life cycle approach towards sustainability. Therefore, this study intends to address the aforementioned challenges. The first part of this study presents the concept of sustainable construction as a system of well-being decoupling and impact decoupling. Findings in the first part of this study provide a rationale for developing a methodological framework that not only encapsulates a TBL based life cycle approach to sustainability assessment in construction, but also evaluates interactions among social and economic well-being, and environmental pressure. In methodological framework development, two decoupling indices were developed, namely, the phase well-being decoupling index (PWBDI K ) and phase impact decoupling index (PIDI K ). PWBDI K and PIDI K support the evaluation of interdependence among social and economic well-being, and the environmental pressure associated with construction projects in different life cycle phases. The calculation underpinning the proposed framework was illustrated using three hypothetical cases by adopting criteria from GRIHA Precertification and GRIHA v.2019 schemes. The results of these cases depict how the interactions among different dimensions (social, economic, and environment) vary as they move from one phase to another phase in a life cycle. The methodological framework developed in this study can be tailored to suit the sustainability assessment requirements for different phases and typologies of construction in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Shivam Srivastava & Usha Iyer Raniga & Sudhir Misra, 2021. "A Methodological Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Construction Projects Incorporating TBL and Decoupling Principles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-52, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2021:i:1:p:197-:d:711205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/1/197/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/1/197/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mohammed Alghaseb & Tariq Alshmlani, 2022. "OSH Performance within TQM Application in Construction Companies: A Qualitative Study in Saudi Arabia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Shabnam Arabpour & Gilbert Silvius, 2023. "Sustainability Interventions of Construction Project Managers—Establishing a Minimum Baseline," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-22, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2021:i:1:p:197-:d:711205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.