IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i1p187-d194336.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Getting Environmental Information from Construction Cost Databases: Applications in Brazilian Courses and Environmental Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Luis Claudio A. Borja

    (Federal Institute of Bahia (IFBA), BR 324-km 102.11, S/N-Aviário, 44135-000 Feira de Santana, Brazil
    Post-Graduate Program in Industrial Engineering (PEI), Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), Aristides Novis, 02, Federação, 40210-630 Salvador, Brazil)

  • Sandro Fábio César

    (Post-Graduate Program in Civil Engineering (PPEC), Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), Aristides Novis, 02, Federação, 40210-630 Salvador, Brazil)

  • Rita Dione A. Cunha

    (Post-Graduate Program in Civil Engineering (PPEC), Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), Aristides Novis, 02, Federação, 40210-630 Salvador, Brazil)

  • Asher Kiperstok

    (Post-Graduate Program in Industrial Engineering (PEI), Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), Aristides Novis, 02, Federação, 40210-630 Salvador, Brazil)

Abstract

The traditional decision-making process in construction is still driven by factors such as cost and time, not adequately addressing indicators to control their environmental impacts. So, how to improve environmental communication to incorporate sustainable building practices. The incorporation of environmental indicators may enlarge the scope of construction management tools. In the case of cost databases, widely used in the construction sector, this action can contribute to the communication and dissemination of environmental practices. This paper mapped 24 indicators from construction cost databases to assess their ability to communicate and disseminate environmental information. The research comprised: (a) a review of the use of cost bases in the environmental study, (b) identification of the most cited bases in 27 Brazilian civil engineering courses, and (c) analysis of the selected databases through of the assessment matrix, it crosses cost data versus environmental information. CYPE, TCPO, and ORSE presented performance medium, and higher results than SINAPI, BDCCM, and BCCA. The tools presented low control over environmental information, such as water and energy consumption, machine circulation and pollution generation. However, it has been observed that when adding environmental indicators, these tools can contribute significantly to disseminate good practices in its wide user base.

Suggested Citation

  • Luis Claudio A. Borja & Sandro Fábio César & Rita Dione A. Cunha & Asher Kiperstok, 2019. "Getting Environmental Information from Construction Cost Databases: Applications in Brazilian Courses and Environmental Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:187-:d:194336
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/187/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/187/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antonio Ángel Rodríguez Serrano & Santiago Porras Álvarez, 2016. "Life Cycle Assessment in Building: A Case Study on the Energy and Emissions Impact Related to the Choice of Housing Typologies and Construction Process in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-29, March.
    2. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Ensslin, Leonardo & Correa, Emerson C. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1999. "Decision Support Systems in action: Integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 315-335, March.
    3. Adrieli Cristina Vieira De Carvalho & Ariovaldo Denis Granja & Vanessa Gomes Da Silva, 2017. "A Systematic Literature Review on Integrative Lean and Sustainability Synergies over a Building’s Lifecycle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Luis Claudio A. Borja & Sandro Fábio César & Rita Dione A. Cunha & Asher Kiperstok, 2018. "A Quantitative Method for Prediction of Environmental Aspects in Construction Sites of Residential Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-38, June.
    5. Liang Wong, Ing & Krüger, Eduardo, 2017. "Comparing energy efficiency labelling systems in the EU and Brazil: Implications, challenges, barriers and opportunities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 310-323.
    6. Ness, Barry & Urbel-Piirsalu, Evelin & Anderberg, Stefan & Olsson, Lennart, 2007. "Categorising tools for sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 498-508, January.
    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. 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.

    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. Luis Claudio A. Borja & Sandro Fábio César & Rita Dione A. Cunha & Asher Kiperstok, 2018. "A Quantitative Method for Prediction of Environmental Aspects in Construction Sites of Residential Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-38, June.
    2. Rubio Rodríguez, M.A. & Ruyck, J. De & Díaz, P. Roque & Verma, V.K. & Bram, S., 2011. "An LCA based indicator for evaluation of alternative energy routes," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(3), pages 630-635, March.
    3. Figge, Frank & Hahn, Tobias & Barkemeyer, Ralf, 2014. "The If, How and Where of assessing sustainable resource use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 274-283.
    4. L. Hay & A. H. B. Duffy & R. I. Whitfield, 2017. "The S‐Cycle Performance Matrix: Supporting Comprehensive Sustainability Performance Evaluation of Technical Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 45-70, January.
    5. Jean-Marc Douguet & Pierre Failler & Gianluca Ferraro, 2022. "Sustainability Assessment of the Societal Costs of Fishing Activities in a Deliberative Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-21, May.
    6. Ensslin, Leonardo & Dezem, Vinicius & Dutra, Ademar & Ensslin, Sandra R. & Somensi, Karine, 2017. "Management support for agricultural enterprises: a case study for a fruit-producing company," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(4), March.
    7. Diana Tuomasjukka & Staffan Berg & Marcus Lindner, 2013. "Managing Sustainability of Fennoscandian Forests and Their Use by Law and/or Agreement: For Whom and Which Purpose?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-32, December.
    8. Georgiadou, Maria Christina & Hacking, Theophilus & Guthrie, Peter, 2012. "A conceptual framework for future-proofing the energy performance of buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 145-155.
    9. Mostafa Shaaban & Jürgen Scheffran & Jürgen Böhner & Mohamed S. Elsobki, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies in Egypt Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    10. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    11. Ngoc-Ninh Ho & Truong Lam Do & Dinh-Thao Tran & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2022. "Indigenous pig production and welfare of ultra-poor ethnic minority households in the Northern mountains of Vietnam," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 156-179, January.
    12. Maria Franca Norese & Diana Rolando & Rocco Curto, 2023. "DIKEDOC: a multicriteria methodology to organise and communicate knowledge," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1049-1082, June.
    13. Schilling, Markus & Chiang, Lichun, 2011. "The effect of natural resources on a sustainable development policy: The approach of non-sustainable externalities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 990-998, February.
    14. Carayannis, Elias G. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Bento, Paulo & Ferreira, João J.M. & Jalali, Marjan S. & Fernandes, Bernardo M.Q., 2018. "Developing a socio-technical evaluation index for tourist destination competitiveness using cognitive mapping and MCDA," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 147-158.
    15. Alexandra Doernberg & Annette Piorr & Ingo Zasada & Dirk Wascher & Ulrich Schmutz, 2022. "Sustainability assessment of short food supply chains (SFSC): developing and testing a rapid assessment tool in one African and three European city regions," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 885-904, September.
    16. Simone Di Leo & Marta Chicca & Cinzia Daraio & Andrea Guerrini & Stefano Scarcella, 2022. "A Framework for the Analysis of the Sustainability of the Energy Retail Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-28, June.
    17. Gomes, Luís S. & Santos, Sérgio P. & Coelho, Luís Serra & Rebelo, Efigénio L., 2023. "Using MCDA to assist an Intermunicipal community develop a resilience strategy in face of the pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    18. Peura, Pekka, 2013. "From Malthus to sustainable energy—Theoretical orientations to reforming the energy sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 309-327.
    19. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Grabisch, Michel & Labreuche, Christophe & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2003. "On the extension of pseudo-Boolean functions for the aggregation of interacting criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 28-47, July.

    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:1:p:187-:d:194336. 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.