IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i6p1645-d215096.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of an Indoor Environmental Quality Assessment Tool for the Rating of Offices in Real Working Conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Devitofrancesco

    (Construction Technologies Institute of the National Research Council of Italy (ITC–CNR), via Lombardia 49, San Giuliano Milanese, 20098 Milan, Italy)

  • Lorenzo Belussi

    (Construction Technologies Institute of the National Research Council of Italy (ITC–CNR), via Lombardia 49, San Giuliano Milanese, 20098 Milan, Italy)

  • Italo Meroni

    (Construction Technologies Institute of the National Research Council of Italy (ITC–CNR), via Lombardia 49, San Giuliano Milanese, 20098 Milan, Italy)

  • Fabio Scamoni

    (Construction Technologies Institute of the National Research Council of Italy (ITC–CNR), via Lombardia 49, San Giuliano Milanese, 20098 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

The Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) refers to the quality of indoor spaces in relation to the health and well-being of users. IEQ is a holistic concept considering various components of the overall indoor comfort: thermo-hygrometric, lighting, air quality and acoustics. Each component is described through specific performance indicators and benchmarks. The quality of the built environment is assessed at different stages from design to operational phase. The scientific literature reports several case studies related to the assessment of the individual components of the IEQ Tools aimed at the evaluation of the overall IEQ. The paper proposes an assessment tool based on the SB Method (Sustainable Building Method) and the Multi Criteria Analysis for the evaluation of IEQ during the operational phase of a building. Each component of IEQ is analysed through objective indicators and calculation methods. The tool provides two main outcomes: a global score expressing the overall performance of the building from the IEQ perspective; quantitative evaluations of all indoor comfort components through monitoring and measurement of the environmental variables. The above contributes to select intervention areas to optimize indoor design and to identify technologies aimed at ensuring the best IEQ levels for users at the operational stage. The system was applied to an open-plan working space of an office building. Monitoring activities and measurements are carried out to detect the indoor and outdoor variables affecting the IEQ. All aspects of IEQ were analysed and quantified so to evaluate the overall performance of the building and provide data to improve the working conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Devitofrancesco & Lorenzo Belussi & Italo Meroni & Fabio Scamoni, 2019. "Development of an Indoor Environmental Quality Assessment Tool for the Rating of Offices in Real Working Conditions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1645-:d:215096
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1645/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1645/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baird, George & Field, Carmeny, 2013. "Thermal comfort conditions in sustainable buildings – Results of a worldwide survey of users’ perceptions," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 44-47.
    2. Michał Piasecki & Mateusz Kozicki & Szymon Firląg & Anna Goljan & Krystyna Kostyrko, 2018. "The Approach of Including TVOCs Concentration in the Indoor Environmental Quality Model (IEQ)—Case Studies of BREEAM Certified Office Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, October.
    3. Carmen María Calama-González & Rafael Suárez & Ángel Luis León-Rodríguez & Simone Ferrari, 2019. "Assessment of Indoor Environmental Quality for Retrofitting Classrooms with An Egg-Crate Shading Device in A Hot Climate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, February.
    4. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    5. Oriol Pons & Albert De la Fuente & Antonio Aguado, 2016. "The Use of MIVES as a Sustainability Assessment MCDM Method for Architecture and Civil Engineering Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-15, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Zhifeng Shen & Xirui Yang & Chunlu Liu & Junjie Li, 2021. "Assessment of Indoor Environmental Quality in Budget Hotels Using Text-Mining Method: Case Study of Top Five Brands in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-24, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mechthild Donner & Anne Verniquet & Jan Broeze & Katrin Kayser & Hugo de Vries, 2021. "Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products," Post-Print hal-03004851, HAL.
    2. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    3. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    4. Jim Butcher, 2006. "The United Nations International Year of Ecotourism: a critical analysis of development implications," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 6(2), pages 146-156, April.
    5. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.
    6. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    7. Megan Devonald & Nicola Jones & Sally Youssef, 2022. "‘We Have No Hope for Anything’: Exploring Interconnected Economic, Social and Environmental Risks to Adolescents in Lebanon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Rigby, Dan & Woodhouse, Phil & Young, Trevor & Burton, Michael, 2001. "Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 463-478, December.
    9. Michael Howes & Liana Wortley & Ruth Potts & Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Julie Davidson & Timothy Smith & Patrick Nunn, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    10. Shiferaw, Bekele & Holden, Stein, 1999. "Soil Erosion and Smallholders' Conservation Decisions in the Highlands of Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 739-752, April.
    11. Ibrahim Ari & Muammer Koc, 2018. "Sustainable Financing for Sustainable Development: Understanding the Interrelations between Public Investment and Sovereign Debt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-25, October.
    12. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    13. Pengji Wang & Adrian T. H. Kuah & Qinye Lu & Caroline Wong & K. Thirumaran & Emmanuel Adegbite & Wesley Kendall, 2021. "The impact of value perceptions on purchase intention of sustainable luxury brands in China and the UK," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 28(3), pages 325-346, May.
    14. Christoph M. Schmidt & Nils aus dem Moore, 2014. "Wie geht es uns? Die W3-Indikatoren für eine neue Wohlstandsmessung," RWI Positionen, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, pages 16, 03.
    15. Katundu Imasiku & Valerie M. Thomas & Etienne Ntagwirumugara, 2020. "Unpacking Ecological Stress from Economic Activities for Sustainability and Resource Optimization in Sub-Saharan Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-12, April.
    16. Chin-Shan Lu & Kuo-Chung Shang & Chi-Chang Lin, 2016. "Examining sustainability performance at ports: port managers’ perspectives on developing sustainable supply chains," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(8), pages 909-927, November.
    17. Kebede, Yohannes, 1993. "The Limits to Common Resource Management: The Bypassed Commons or Commons without Tragedy," MPRA Paper 662, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 May 1993.
    18. John Stanley & Janet Stanley, 2023. "Improving Appraisal Methodology for Land Use Transport Measures to Reduce Risk of Social Exclusion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-18, August.
    19. Piotr Siemiątkowski & Patryk Tomaszewski & Joanna Marszałek-Kawa & Janusz Gierszewski, 2020. "The Financing of Renewable Energy Sources and the Level of Sustainable Development of Poland’s Provinces in the Area of Environmental Order," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    20. J.C. Gaillard, 2010. "Vulnerability, capacity and resilience: Perspectives for climate and development policy," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 218-232.

    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:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1645-:d:215096. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.