IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i15p8139-d598399.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Method to Include Life Cycle Assessment Results in Choosing by Advantage (CBA) Multicriteria Decision Analysis. A Case Study for Seismic Retrofit in Peruvian Primary Schools

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Vázquez-Rowe

    (Peruvian Life Cycle Assessment and Industrial Ecology Network (PELCAN), Department of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima 15088, Peru)

  • Cristina Córdova-Arias

    (GETEC Research Group, Department of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima 15088, Peru)

  • Xavier Brioso

    (GETEC Research Group, Department of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima 15088, Peru)

  • Sandra Santa-Cruz

    (GERDIS Research Group, Department of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima 15088, Peru)

Abstract

Building information modeling (BIM) is an emerging technology that improves visualization, understanding, and transparency in construction projects. Its use in Latin America and the Caribbean (LA&C), while still scarce, is developing in combination with multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods, such as the choosing by advantages (CBA) method. Despite the holistic nature of MCDM methods, the inclusion of life cycle environmental metrics is lagging in construction projects in LA&C. However, recent studies point toward the need to optimize the synergies between BIM and life cycle assessment (LCA), in which a method like CBA could allow improving the quality of the decisions. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to integrate LCA and CBA methods to identify the effect that the inclusion of environmental impacts can have on decision-making in public procurement, as well as comparing how this final decision differs from an exclusively LCA-oriented interpretation of the results. Once the LCA was performed, a set of additional criteria for the CBA method were fixed, including transparency, technical, and social indicators. Thereafter, a stakeholder participative workshop was held in order to gather experts to elucidate on the final decision. The methodology was applied to a relevant construction sector problem modelled with BIM in the city of Lima (Peru), which consisted of three different construction techniques needed to retrofit educational institutions. Results from the LCA-oriented assessment, which was supported by Monte Carlo simulation, revealed a situation in which the masonry-based technique showed significantly lower environmental impacts than the remaining two options. However, when a wider range of technical, social, and transparency criteria are added to the environmental indicators, this low-carbon technique only prevailed in those workshop tables in which environmental experts were present and under specific computational assumptions, whereas teams with a higher proportion of government members were inclined to foster alternatives that imply less bureaucratic barriers. Finally, the results constitute an important milestone when it comes to including environmental factors in public procurement in LA&C.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Vázquez-Rowe & Cristina Córdova-Arias & Xavier Brioso & Sandra Santa-Cruz, 2021. "A Method to Include Life Cycle Assessment Results in Choosing by Advantage (CBA) Multicriteria Decision Analysis. A Case Study for Seismic Retrofit in Peruvian Primary Schools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8139-:d:598399
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8139/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8139/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christina Paxson & Norbert R. Schady, 2002. "The Allocation and Impact of Social Funds: Spending on School Infrastructure in Peru," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 16(2), pages 297-319, August.
    2. Cabeza, Luisa F. & Rincón, Lídia & Vilariño, Virginia & Pérez, Gabriel & Castell, Albert, 2014. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 394-416.
    3. Tajda Potrč Obrecht & Martin Röck & Endrit Hoxha & Alexander Passer, 2020. "BIM and LCA Integration: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Tarantini, Mario & Loprieno, Arianna Dominici & Porta, Pier Luigi, 2011. "A life cycle approach to Green Public Procurement of building materials and elements: A case study on windows," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 2473-2482.
    5. Mutch, Carol, 2015. "The role of schools in disaster settings: Learning from the 2010–2011 New Zealand earthquakes," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 283-291.
    6. Jeff Tollefson, 2021. "US pledges to dramatically slash greenhouse emissions over next decade," Nature, Nature, vol. 592(7856), pages 673-673, April.
    7. Ghaffarianhoseini, Ali & Tookey, John & Ghaffarianhoseini, Amirhosein & Naismith, Nicola & Azhar, Salman & Efimova, Olia & Raahemifar, Kaamran, 2017. "Building Information Modelling (BIM) uptake: Clear benefits, understanding its implementation, risks and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1046-1053.
    8. Xiaoli Wang & Yun Liu & Yanbing Ju, 2018. "Sustainable Public Procurement Policies on Promoting Scientific and Technological Innovation in China: Comparisons with the U.S., the UK, Japan, Germany, France, and South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-27, June.
    9. Vázquez-Rowe, Ian & Reyna, Janet L. & García-Torres, Samy & Kahhat, Ramzy, 2015. "Is climate change-centrism an optimal policy making strategy to set national electricity mixes?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 108-116.
    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. Antonio Lombardi Netto & Valerio Antonio Pamplona Salomon & Miguel Angel Ortiz Barrios, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Analysis of Green Bonds: Hybrid Multi-Method Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-20, September.
    2. Jan Růžička & Jakub Veselka & Zdeněk Rudovský & Stanislav Vitásek & Petr Hájek, 2022. "BIM and Automation in Complex Building Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20, February.

    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. Yasser Yahya Al-Ashmori & Idris Othman & Al-Hussein M. H. Al-Aidrous, 2022. "“Values, Challenges, and Critical Success Factors” of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in Malaysia: Experts Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Marco Scherz & Antonija Ana Wieser & Alexander Passer & Helmuth Kreiner, 2022. "Implementation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in the Procurement Process of Buildings: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Pablo Ibarraran & Miguel Sarzosa & Yuri Suarez Dillon Soares, 2008. "The Welfare Impacts of Local Investment Projects: Evidence from the Guatemala FIS," OVE Working Papers 0208, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE).
    4. Burek, Jasmina & Nutter, Darin W., 2019. "A life cycle assessment-based multi-objective optimization of the purchased, solar, and wind energy for the grocery, perishables, and general merchandise multi-facility distribution center network," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 1427-1446.
    5. Yu Cao & Cong Xu & Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman & Nur Mardhiyah Aziz, 2022. "A Systematic Review of Green Building Development in China: Advantages, Challenges and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-29, September.
    6. Araujo, M. Caridad & Ferreira, Francisco H.G. & Lanjouw, Peter & Özler, Berk, 2008. "Local inequality and project choice: Theory and evidence from Ecuador," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1022-1046, June.
    7. Agnieszka Leśniak & Monika Górka & Izabela Skrzypczak, 2021. "Barriers to BIM Implementation in Architecture, Construction, and Engineering Projects—The Polish Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-20, April.
    8. Eric W. Djimeu, 2014. "Does social action fund promote schooling in conflict affected countries? Mixed evidence from Angola," HiCN Working Papers 189, Households in Conflict Network.
    9. Marie Nehasilová & Antonín Lupíšek & Petra Lupíšková Coufalová & Tomáš Kupsa & Jakub Veselka & Barbora Vlasatá & Julie Železná & Pavla Kunová & Martin Volf, 2022. "Rapid Environmental Assessment of Buildings: Linking Environmental and Cost Estimating Databases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Sierra-Pérez, Jorge & Rodríguez-Soria, Beatriz & Boschmonart-Rives, Jesús & Gabarrell, Xavier, 2018. "Integrated life cycle assessment and thermodynamic simulation of a public building’s envelope renovation: Conventional vs. Passivhaus proposal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1510-1521.
    11. Luis M. López-Ochoa & Jesús Las-Heras-Casas & Luis M. López-González & César García-Lozano, 2020. "Energy Renovation of Residential Buildings in Cold Mediterranean Zones Using Optimized Thermal Envelope Insulation Thicknesses: The Case of Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-34, March.
    12. Suzanne Benn & Damien Giurco & Paul James Brown & Renu Agarwal, 2014. "Towards Responsible Steel: Preliminary Insights," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16, March.
    13. Sungwoo Lee & Sungho Tae & Seungjun Roh & Taehyung Kim, 2015. "Green Template for Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings Based on Building Information Modeling: Focus on Embodied Environmental Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Patricia González-Vallejo & Radu Muntean & Jaime Solís-Guzmán & Madelyn Marrero, 2020. "Carbon Footprint of Dwelling Construction in Romania and Spain. A Comparative Analysis with the OERCO2 Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    15. José Ángel Aranda & Norena Martin-Dorta & Ferran Naya & Julián Conesa-Pastor & Manuel Contero, 2020. "Sustainability and Interoperability: An Economic Study on BIM Implementation by a Small Civil Engineering Firm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-16, November.
    16. Roux, Charlotte & Schalbart, Patrick & Assoumou, Edi & Peuportier, Bruno, 2016. "Integrating climate change and energy mix scenarios in LCA of buildings and districts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 619-629.
    17. Cui, Li & Chan, Hing Kai & Zhou, Yizhuo & Dai, Jing & Lim, Jia Jia, 2019. "Exploring critical factors of green business failure based on Grey-Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 450-461.
    18. Antonello Monsù Scolaro & Stefania De Medici, 2021. "Downcycling and Upcycling in Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse of Pre-Existing Buildings: Re-Designing Technological Performances in an Environmental Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, October.
    19. Jolien Grandia & Dylan Voncken, 2019. "Sustainable Public Procurement: The Impact of Ability, Motivation, and Opportunity on the Implementation of Different Types of Sustainable Public Procurement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    20. Maria Anna Cusenza & Teresa Maria Gulotta & Marina Mistretta & Maurizio Cellura, 2021. "Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of the Thermal Insulation Improvement in Residential Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-21, 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:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8139-:d:598399. 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.