SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AT A PROJECT LEVEL: A MODIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM STRUCTURE

Transcription

1 SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AT A PROJECT LEVEL: A MODIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM STRUCTURE Urban PERSSON Lic. Eng. Anne LANDIN Ass Prof. Stefan OLANDER Ph.D. Mats PERSSON Ph.D. Division of Construction Management, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, urban.persson@bekon.lth.se anne.landin@bekon.lth.se, stefan.olander@bekon.lth.se, mats.persson@bekon.lth.se Keywords: sustainable construction, project management, knowledge transfer, quality, stakeholder, Summary The management of a construction project in a sustainable way should focus on the entire process from an early design stage towards the final product, and on the benefits and negative impacts that are to be expected during the life of the facility. The research presented here argues that there is a difference between sustainable building and sustainable construction, where the first considers the final product and the latter considers the way to the final product, i.e. the process. To manage such a process, in a sustainable way, there is a need of some kind of management system or tool from the perspective of process owner and the management of the project. To link sustainability with quality and environmental aspects is one way to systemise this process. Common and useful structures are the international standard of the environmental management system ISO and the international quality management system ISO This linkage could be achieved by using a sustainability evaluation model, STURE, where the construction project stakeholder s different demands are considered alongside the quality and environmental aspects. The result is a suggestion of a combined system/tool of how to manage the process of a construction project s sustainability, environmental and quality aspects towards a sustainable building. 1. Introduction At present, actors within the construction sector in Sweden are endeavouring to develop a more effective process than hitherto available for achieving a combination of high quality, economic advantage and sustainable construction management. The management team of a sustainable construction project should focus on the entire process from an early design stage towards the final product, on the benefits and negative impacts regarding the triple bottom lines of sustainability that are to be expected during the life of the final product, i.e. the facility. There are relatively few examples of good practice regarding sustainability in mainstream construction. It seems that clients and project managers face barriers to implement sustainable construction. Williams and Dair (2005) found at least 12 barriers to implementation. The most common were lack of consideration of sustainable measures, real and perceived costs and inadequate expertise and powers. A common misunderstanding in the construction sector is that sustainable buildings are more expensive in investment cost than normal mainstream buildings. A survey by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD 2008) investigated the difference in investment between a normal building and a certified sustainable building. The result indicated that sustainability concerns should be about 17% more expensive in investment cost. Other sources indicate up to +15% (Lützkendorf 2005). Kats et al, 2003, and Matheissen and Morris, 2007, found that a green building is cost effective, no additional cost compared to normal buildings is necessary and the total benefits over the life cycle are over ten times the average initial investment required to design and construct a green building. It seems that the stakeholders to the project, i.e. clients and building professionals, are not well enough informed about the basic linkage between construction and sustainability. It is important to clarify the difference between sustainable building and sustainable construction, where the first considers the final product and the latter considers the way to the final product, i.e. the process. To manage such a process, in a sustainable way, there is a need for some kind of management system or tool from the perspective of the process owner and the management team of the project. To link sustainability with quality and environmental aspects is one way of systemising this Authors Index Program Index

2 process. Common and useful structures are the international standard of the environmental management system ISO and the international quality management system ISO This linkage could be achieved by using a sustainability evaluation model, STURE (Persson and Olander 2004; and Persson et. al. 2005), offering a triple bottom line perspective where the construction project stakeholder s different demands are considered alongside quality and environmental aspects. 2. Sustainability as Sustainable Building and Sustainable Construction (Product and Process) Views of sustainability are quite different with shifting focus of content from a regional/national level to the individual level and from different nations/regions to different cultures and societies. The terms sustainable building, sustainable construction, green building and so forth are interpreted quite differently by involved stakeholders depending of education, age, cultural background etc. (Cole and Lorch 2003). It also seems to be quite confusing where differences between the terms, especially between sustainable construction and sustainable building, are concerned. If sustainable building considers the final product, i.e. the building, then sustainable construction is about the whole process towards the final product and during the product s lifetime. The process includes the stages of pre-design, design, procurement, construction, operation, maintenance, refurbishment, re-construction, demolition and recycling. Construction itself could imply everything between site-specific activities to the creation of human settlements. Sustainability on the other hand should imply a holistic view; the whole is more than the sum of its parts with relationships and interactions between humans, society, the biosphere, economy and the state of technology (Plessis 2007).. Sustainability in construction has been defined by Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction (CIB 1999). There is a present standardization process through Agenda 21 known as ISO FDIS 1532:2008 Sustainability in Building Construction General Principles. Sustainable buildings, as cited by Trinius and Sjöström (2008), provide the required performance with minimum adverse environmental impact, while encouraging improvements in economic, social and cultural aspects at local, regional and global levels Sustainable building E cological sustainability E conomic sustainability Protection of resources P rotection of the ecosystem L ong term resou rce p roductivity L ow running costs Social and cultural sustainability P rotection of com fort and health Preservation of social and cu ltural valu es Figure 1 Sustainable building (Kohler 1999) A sustainable building could also be defined as buildings that contribute to sustainable development (Lützkendorf 2005) or as described in Figure 1 (Kohler 1999). The right column defines the performance objectives of a sustainable building regarding the principles of the triple bottom line of sustainability; ecological, economic and social/cultural development having equal importance (Pope et al 2004). O Connor (2006) argues for a fourth part or sphere to be involved in sustainability: The political sphere that acts as a rule and regulation setter of, and between, the other three. Sustainable construction can be interpreted in many different ways. It covers a broad and complex interaction between involved stakeholders, aesthetic issues, material interactions and functionality. To find a definition of this process in terms of sustainable building over its life cycle is one of a few clarifying terms in regard to sustainable construction made by CIB, UNEP and the research institutions CSIR and CIDB of 1 ISO 14001, 2004: Environmental management systems Requirements with guidance for use. ISO 14001: ISO 9001, 2000: Quality management systems Requirements ISO 9001: Authors Index Program Index

3 South Africa in their Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries (UNEP et al 2002, Plessis 2007): principles of sustainable development are applied to the comprehensive construction cycle, from the extraction and beneficiation of raw materials, trough the planning, design and construction of buildings and infrastructure, until their final deconstruction and management of the resultant waste. It is a holistic process aiming to restore and maintain harmony between the natural and built environments, while creating settlements that affirm human dignity and encourage economic equity. This supports the triple bottom line philosophy mentioned above and should also be applicable in a country anywhere in the world despite its level of industrial development. 3. Project, Knowledge and Sustainability Management Linkage through STURE As sustainability issues increase total complexity in a construction project, the ability and the knowledge of the project management team has to be deeper and broader. This increasing complexness is visualised by Hacking and Guthrie (2008), who compared the assessment methods of traditional environmental impact assessment (EIA) with a sustainability assessment, Figure 2. This requires it to be a more strategic and holistic way of dealing with these issues on the part of the project management team. Figure 2 The complexity of assessment methods (Hacking and Guthrie 2008) The low degree of transfer of experience gained within the construction process to those participating in it has been noted frequently, a weakness that reflects a lack of a natural forum for the distribution of information. There is a need for some system for reporting experience gained in such a way that those engaged in the chain of tasks to be performed can access the knowledge and experience of others, both during a project and afterwards. If no such transfer of knowledge and experience takes place, there is the risk of the firm failing to take advantage of what has been learned and of it making the same mistakes again. The assembly of information relevant to a project is part of the requirements of the managerial system generally, as expressed in the set of international standards ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001:2004, which are common used in the construction sector. The complexity of the construction process means, however, that special measures are called for if the collection of relevant information, including the experience that has been gained and made available to those in need of it, is to function properly. The continual public debate regarding what takes place within the construction sector is considered by many to reflect flaws in the quality assurance system and the lack of a well-functioning system for collecting and distributing knowledge. There is good reason behind the construction sector s endeavour to identify ways in which the functioning of these two systems can be improved. In temporary organizations, such as those in construction, knowledge of a specific project and the use of routine checklists often play a central role. Knowledge and information often need to be handed on to the next actor in a sort of relay race. It can be difficult at times for the craftsman to understand from explicit sources how a particular step in the construction process is to be carried out to satisfy the demands for sustainable construction. Tacit knowledge can play a major role under such circumstances, meaning doing what one is accustomed to do, without studying drawings or written materials. The willingness to work in this way (i.e. figure things out on the spot) can be a positive trait, especially when no drawings or descriptions of the exact procedures to carry out are available. Yet, it can lead to insufficient precision and result in quality, environmental and sustainability requirements not being met (Persson 2006) Authors Index Program Index

4 A case study performed at an SME in Sweden serves as an example to illustrate possible ways of coping with problems during the production stage when new systems are tried, e.g. managing sustainability issues. The overall aim of the study was to analyze how knowledge and experience can best be made available continually to those in need of it, with a system being designed to serve these ends as effectively as possible. A specific objective of the study was to investigate how a particular construction company deals with the knowledge potentially available to it and how the organizational work of the company supports its knowledge management efforts (Persson 2006). Nonconformity as defined in terms of ISO 9000 should represent an ideal point of departure for learning and for the transfer of knowledge (Persson 2006). Nonconformity in terms of ISO 9000 can be noted in managerial reviews, which concern primarily matters of documentation, routines and procedures of a general nature. One reason why it may be difficult in a business organization to deal adequately with both major problems as well as lesser problems is that there is much greater profit for a firm in using most of the limited resources it has for business of major importance than in concentrating on overcoming weaknesses in areas of little financial importance. Managerial reviews should be concerned in part with questions of the quality and environmental management system. Another possible reason for the limited attention of nonconformities and not being documented can have to do with the working culture in the construction sector. Instead, it is a conversational culture in which the social network and people s discussions with each other are regarded as the major ways of spreading knowledge and information, although this is a matter that was not investigated systematically (Gluch 2005). The protocols of the management reviews make note of significant matters of experience taken up in the meetings for sharing experience (Persson 2006). Certain comments by customers are also contained in these protocols. There appears to be a lack of effort in the protocols, however, in combining and integrating the information from different sources taken up in the meetings. In order to bridge the gap between project management routines supported by ISO9001 and ISO1400, the knowledge transfer as described above and the new and unknown sustainability management the authors propose to link these issues by using a sustainability evaluation model as the Stakeholder Urban Evaluation Model (STURE) see Figure 3 (Persson and Olander 2004, Persson, Olander and Landin 2005). In this decision model the stakeholder s different demands are considered alongside the quality and environmental aspects. Stakeholder Analysis Specific Conditions -Sustainability Review -Significant Sustainability Aspects -Documentation General Conditions -Environmental Policy -Economic Conditions -Legal Conditions -Project Standards etc. Sustainability objectives Economic Ecological Social Cultural Sustainability Programme -Priority of Sustainability Objectives -Sustainability Targets Applications Evaluation Tools Figure 3 The STURE model (Persson and Olander 2004; and Persson et. al. 2005) The principle of STURE comprises four steps: stakeholder analysis, specific conditions for the actual application, general conditions that need to be addressed and the sustainability programme. This last step acts as a synthesis of the other three steps. This concept corresponds to the environmental management Authors Index Program Index

5 standard of ISO with the distinction of exchanging all terms defined with the prefix or suffix of environmental to the triple bottom line definition of the term sustainability. STURE could be described as an objectives-led integrated assessment (Figure 4) applied at the project level, but it also could be the prototype of a sustainable assessment method suggested by Pope et al (2004). Figure 4 An objectives-led integrated assessment approach to sustainability assessment (Pope et al 2006). 4. Stakeholder Concerns It seems that information between the involved stakeholders in a construction project is one essential and missing part, especially regarding complex relationships and interactions related to sustainability issues. The communication of sustainable issues can be the difference between a successful project and a failure. In order to obtain acceptance to construct a facility from its various stakeholders, it is often a requirement to communicate the triple bottom line impact that the facility brings. Communication should thus be seen as an essential part of project manager s efforts to manage stakeholder interests with respect to the purpose of the project and to the impacts of the sustainability that it brings. If the project management team, through communication, can create a working dialogue, it may be easier to pinpoint the real conflicts in a project and eliminate false conflicts and misunderstandings, thus reaching acceptance for the project (De Laval 1999). In other words it is essential to know who the stakeholders are and their needs and concerns in relation to the purpose of the project. In the construction sector, stakeholders include a wide range of entities that directly or indirectly can provide support or resistance to the accomplishment of project objectives (Walker 2000). Karlsen (2002) argues that there are at least four reasons for performing a stakeholder management process. First, to be acquainted with the project s stakeholders; second, to ensure the balance between contribution and reward in the relationship with stakeholders; third, to plan and define how to manage stakeholder concerns; and last, to set a base for deciding which stakeholders are to be involved in determining the project goals and the measurement of success. Stakeholders can be divided into internal and external (Gibson 2000). The external stakeholders are those affected by the project in a significant way, but not directly involved in execution of the project (such as neighbours, the community, the general public, as well as trade and industry) Often, both proponent and opponents to a construction project argue their case from a perspective of sustainable development, which means that it is important for the project management team to clearly and openly evaluate all possible options to obtain the project purpose with respect to the relevant sustainable issues from the perspective of the project stakeholders. It is thus relevant for a construction project manager to have tools and methods to combine the goals and purpose of the project with the concerns and needs of various stakeholders divided into the triple bottom line aspects of sustainable construction. 5. Conclusions As argued before, the broad spectra of sustainability increase the complexity of the number of decisions the project team has to make during the process of a construction project. Information is circulating in the companies, but the companies lack any system for transforming this into knowledge needed to move the process towards sustainable construction. When it concerns to involve the stakeholders in the process, internal and external, there is a need for a combined method/tool for the project management team in relation to the process of the project s sustainability, environmental and quality aspects towards a sustainable building. Using the model of STURE, the team could make a structure of sustainability, environmental and quality issues linked to the project and to the demands of the stakeholders alongside the technical solutions. This may not guarantee the all best solutions regarding sustainability, as shown in Figure 3, but it could reveal the best path towards a sustainable building from the specific project s conditions, the project team and the client s ability to deal with the subject and demands from the users and other involved stakeholders. However, we have seen that this area is important in a larger context and we have been inspired by ongoing research in other countries and research groups which confirms this research direction as valid Authors Index Program Index

6 References CIB, 1999: Agenda 21 on Sustainable Construction. CIB report Publication 237, July 1999, Rotterdam, The Netherlands Cole, R. J. and Lorch R. 2003: Buildings, Culture & Environment: Informing local & global practices. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, UK De Laval, S. 1999: Planerare och boende i dialog [Planners and Residents in Dialogue], Institutionen för Arkitektur och stadsbyggnad, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm, Sweden Gibson, K. 2000: The moral basis of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(3), pp Gluch P. 2005; Building Green - Perspectives on Environmental Mangagement in Construction, Building Economics and Management, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden Hacking T. and Guthrie P. 2008: A framework for clarifying the meaning of Triple Bottom-Line, Integrated, and Sustainability Assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28, pp Karlsen, J T. 2002: Project Stakeholder Management, Engineering Management Journal, 14(4), pp Kats G. Alevantis L. Berman A. Mills E. Perlman J. 2003: The Costs and Financial benefits of Green Buildings. A report to California s Sustainable Building Task Force October 2003 Kohler, N. 1999: The relevance of Green Building Challenge: an observer s perspective. Building Research & Information, 27(4/5), pp Lützkendorf T. and Lorenz D. 2005: Sustainable property investment: valuing sustainable buildings through property performances assessment. Building Research & Information 33(3, Matheissen L.F. and Morris P. 2007: The Cost of Green Revisited - Re-examining the Feasibility and Cost Impact of Sustainable Design in the Light of Increased Market Adoption. Davis Langdon, USA O Connor M. 2006: The Four Spheres framework for sustainability. Ecological complexity, 3, pp Persson M. 2006: Lessons Learned in Knowledge Management the case of construction. Construction Management, Department of Construction Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden Persson U. and Olander S. 2004: Methods to Estimate Stakeholder Views of Sustainability for Construction Projects. Proceedings, Built Environments and Environmental Building, 21 st International Conference Passive and Low Energy Architecture, PLEA 2004, Eindhoven, The Netherlands Persson U. Olander S and Landin A. 2005: Evaluation of Sustainable Aspects in Real Estate Management. Proceedings,, The 2005 World Sustainable Building Conference in Tokyo, SB05Tokyo, Japan Plessis, C. D. 2007: A strategic framework for sustainable construction in developing countries, Construction Management and Economics, 25(1), pp Pope J. et al 2004: Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, pp Trinius W. Sjöström C. 2008: First project report. Smart-ECO- Sustainable Smart Eco-Buildings in the EU, CIB News Article March 2008, UNEP et al, 2002: Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries: a discussion document. Boutek Report No Bou/E0204, Pretoria, South Africa Walker, D H T. 2000: Client/customer or stakeholder focus? ISO EMS as a construction industry case study, TQM Magazine, 12(1), pp WBCSD 2008: The times they are a-changin change, WBCSD annual review World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva, Switzerland, February 2008 Williams K. and Dair C. 2005: What is stopping sustainable building in England? Barriers experienced by stakeholders in delivering sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 15, pp Authors Index Program Index