IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5009-d799286.html

Life Cycle Analysis Challenges through Building Rating Schemes within the European Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Borja Izaola

    (Department of Graphic Design and Engineering Projects, Faculty of Engineering, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Plaza Ingeniero Torres Quevedo, 48013 Bilbao, Spain
    Green Building Council España (GBCe), 28014 Madrid, Spain)

  • Ortzi Akizu-Gardoki

    (Department of Graphic Design and Engineering Projects, Faculty of Engineering, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Plaza Ingeniero Torres Quevedo, 48013 Bilbao, Spain
    Life Cycle Thinking Group, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Plaza Ingeniero Torres Quevedo 1, 48013 Bilbao, Spain)

  • Xabat Oregi

    (CAVIAR Research Group, Department of Architecture, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Plaza Oñati, 2, 20018 Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain)

Abstract

The decarbonisation of buildings is a crucial milestone if European cities mean to reach their mitigation targets. The construction sector was responsible for 38% of the GHG emissions in 2020. From these emissions, 11% is calculated to be currently embodied in building materials. In this context, an evaluation from a life cycle perspective is becoming increasingly necessary to achieve the objectives set. Currently, there are different building rating systems (BRS) at European level that allow the evaluation of the degree of sustainability of buildings. During this study, the authors have evaluated to what extent and how the most extended five BRS (NF Habitat HQE, VERDE, DGNB, BREEAM, and HPI systems) in the European framework have integrated the life cycle methodology during their evaluation process. Four methodologies have been used in the research in order to analyse these five systems: quantitative assessment, multi-level perspective, mapping–gap analysis, and expert interviews. Although each methodology has produced different results, the need to harmonise the evaluation criteria at the European level, the insufficient consistency of data software, and the availability of skilled LCA professionals for wider LCA market penetration, among others, should be highlighted. The quality and harmonised data of construction products is required for LCA to give aggregated and transformative results.

Suggested Citation

  • Borja Izaola & Ortzi Akizu-Gardoki & Xabat Oregi, 2022. "Life Cycle Analysis Challenges through Building Rating Schemes within the European Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-24, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5009-:d:799286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5009/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5009/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    2. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    3. Pamela Del Rosario & Elisabetta Palumbo & Marzia Traverso, 2021. "Environmental Product Declarations as Data Source for the Environmental Assessment of Buildings in the Context of Level(s) and DGNB: How Feasible Is Their Adoption?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, May.
    4. Elena Bernardi & Salvatore Carlucci & Cristina Cornaro & Rolf André Bohne, 2017. "An Analysis of the Most Adopted Rating Systems for Assessing the Environmental Impact of Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-27, July.
    5. Theofano Fotiou & Alessia de Vita & Pantelis Capros, 2019. "Economic-Engineering Modelling of the Buildings Sector to Study the Transition towards Deep Decarbonisation in the EU," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-28, July.
    6. Röck, Martin & Saade, Marcella Ruschi Mendes & Balouktsi, Maria & Rasmussen, Freja Nygaard & Birgisdottir, Harpa & Frischknecht, Rolf & Habert, Guillaume & Lützkendorf, Thomas & Passer, Alexander, 2020. "Embodied GHG emissions of buildings – The hidden challenge for effective climate change mitigation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    7. Wang, Huan & Chen, Wenying & Shi, Jingcheng, 2018. "Low carbon transition of global building sector under 2- and 1.5-degree targets," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 148-157.
    8. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    9. Antonio Sánchez Cordero & Sergio Gómez Melgar & José Manuel Andújar Márquez, 2019. "Green Building Rating Systems and the New Framework Level(s): A Critical Review of Sustainability Certification within Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.
    10. Stefan Pauliuk & Niko Heeren & Peter Berrill & Tomer Fishman & Andrea Nistad & Qingshi Tu & Paul Wolfram & Edgar G. Hertwich, 2021. "Global scenarios of resource and emission savings from material efficiency in residential buildings and cars," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    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. Bernardette Soust-Verdaguer & Elisabetta Palumbo & Carmen Llatas & Álvaro Velasco Acevedo & María Dolores Fernández Galvéz & Endrit Hoxha & Alexander Passer, 2023. "The Use of Environmental Product Declarations of Construction Products as a Data Source to Conduct a Building Life-Cycle Assessment in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Markel Arbulu & Xabat Oregi & Lauren Etxepare, 2025. "Optimisation of Passive Energy Renovation Strategies in Residential Buildings for Life Cycle Global Warming Potential Reduction and Cost-effectiveness," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 5(8), pages 6803-6823, December.

    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. Khatoon, Tohmina & Kivimaa, Paula & Brisbois, Marie Claire & Saadi, Shah Abdul, 2024. "A global south perspective on the interplay between innovation policy mix and technological innovation systems dynamics: The case of Dhaka City's road passenger transport system," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Kivimaa, Paula & Rogge, Karoline S., 2022. "Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. Ana Ferreira & Manuel Pinheiro & Jorge de Brito & Ricardo Mateus, 2022. "Assessing the Sustainability of Retail Buildings: The Portuguese Method LiderA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-26, November.
    4. Ystmark Bjerkan, Kristin & Babri, Sahar, 2024. "Transitioning e-commerce: Perceived pathways for the Norwegian urban freight sector," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    5. Marcel Bednarz & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Pulled or pushed? The spatial diffusion of wind energy between local demand and supply," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 893-916.
    6. Pradeep Racherla & Munir Mandviwalla, 2013. "Moving from Access to Use of the Information Infrastructure: A Multilevel Sociotechnical Framework," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 709-730, September.
    7. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    8. Jiang, Syuan-Yi, 2022. "Transition and innovation ecosystem – investigating technologies, focal actors, and institution in eHealth innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    9. Lee, Junmin & Kim, Keungoui & Kim, Jiyong & Hwang, Junseok, 2022. "The relationship between shared mobility and regulation in South Korea: A system dynamics approach from the socio-technical transitions perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    10. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    11. Bjerkan, Kristin Ystmark & Seter, Hanne, 2021. "Policy and politics in energy transitions. A case study on shore power in Oslo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    12. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    13. Valery Michaux, 2022. "Transformations in the automotive sector: complex change, deeper reconfiguration or dangerous disruption? [Les six mutations du secteur automobile : simple transformation, reconfiguration plus profonde, ou dangereuse disruption ?]," Post-Print hal-03736166, HAL.
    14. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    15. Taheri, Mozhdeh & van Geenhuizen, Marina, 2016. "Teams' boundary-spanning capacity at university: Performance of technology projects in commercialization," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 31-43.
    16. Jacek Michalak & Bartosz Michałowski, 2022. "Understanding Sustainability of Construction Products: Answers from Investors, Contractors, and Sellers of Building Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-14, March.
    17. Moradi, Afsaneh & Vagnoni, Emidia, 2018. "A multi-level perspective analysis of urban mobility system dynamics: What are the future transition pathways?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 231-243.
    18. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," KRTK-KTI WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    19. Nesari, Mohammad & Naghizadeh, Mohammad & Ghazinoori, Soroush & Manteghi, Manoochehr, 2022. "The evolution of socio-technical transition studies: A scientometric analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    20. Paula Kivimaa & Karoline S. Rogge, 2020. "Interplay of Policy Experimentation and Institutional Change in Transformative Policy Mixes: The Case of Mobility as a Service in Finland," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:2022:i:9:p:5009-:d:799286. 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.