Midpoint and endpoint impact categories in Green building rating systems

Midpoint and endpoint impact categories in Green building rating systems Green building rating systems (GBRSs) address a variety of areas of protection to solve current environmental problems. This is more relevant to decision making but not as scientifically reliable as following the midpoint and endpoint approaches. The purpose of this paper is to pinpoint the lack of a standard base for carrying environmental assessment and show the interrelations between eleven most widely used GBRSs in these terms through a descriptive statistical analysis. The study adopts a qualitative and quantitative methodology through credits' classification method, quantitative assessment and comparison on the level of midpoint and endpoint impact categories. The first step requires expanding the discussion to include different methods and levels of incorporating Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to support credits’ requirements. For other non-LCA based credits, a quantification index is used to express the contribution of each credit to the respective quantifiable inventory of midpoint impact categories. The analysis shows that the total weighted sum of midpoint and endpoint scores differ from one GBRS to another. Nevertheless, the correlation matrix indicates interrelations of some GBRSs which adopt similar approaches to address environmental problems. The study concludes that existing GBRSs although they have similar targets, they exhibit discrepancies in the base of their environmental assessment. This does not provide a robust base for comparing the outcome results and indicates the need for restructuring credits according to the midpoint and endpoint approaches. This investigation adds to the existing body of literature to demonstrate with evidence the need for using both approaches in a consistent framework for modelling environmental assessment. This allows optimum use of the benefits and overcomes existing gaps and limitations of both of them. This can assist GBRSs plan for future development in correspondence with national targets and international environmental initiatives. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cleaner Production Elsevier

Midpoint and endpoint impact categories in Green building rating systems

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/midpoint-and-endpoint-impact-categories-in-green-building-rating-MzBaunF244
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0959-6526
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.217
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Green building rating systems (GBRSs) address a variety of areas of protection to solve current environmental problems. This is more relevant to decision making but not as scientifically reliable as following the midpoint and endpoint approaches. The purpose of this paper is to pinpoint the lack of a standard base for carrying environmental assessment and show the interrelations between eleven most widely used GBRSs in these terms through a descriptive statistical analysis. The study adopts a qualitative and quantitative methodology through credits' classification method, quantitative assessment and comparison on the level of midpoint and endpoint impact categories. The first step requires expanding the discussion to include different methods and levels of incorporating Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to support credits’ requirements. For other non-LCA based credits, a quantification index is used to express the contribution of each credit to the respective quantifiable inventory of midpoint impact categories. The analysis shows that the total weighted sum of midpoint and endpoint scores differ from one GBRS to another. Nevertheless, the correlation matrix indicates interrelations of some GBRSs which adopt similar approaches to address environmental problems. The study concludes that existing GBRSs although they have similar targets, they exhibit discrepancies in the base of their environmental assessment. This does not provide a robust base for comparing the outcome results and indicates the need for restructuring credits according to the midpoint and endpoint approaches. This investigation adds to the existing body of literature to demonstrate with evidence the need for using both approaches in a consistent framework for modelling environmental assessment. This allows optimum use of the benefits and overcomes existing gaps and limitations of both of them. This can assist GBRSs plan for future development in correspondence with national targets and international environmental initiatives.

Journal

Journal of Cleaner ProductionElsevier

Published: May 1, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off