No abstract

Green roofs may be considered a passive energy saving technology that also offer benefits like environmental friendliness and enhancement of aesthetic and architectural qualities of buildings. This paper examines the energy and economic viability of the green roof technology in the hot humid climate of Saudi Arabia by considering a modern four bedroom residential building in the city of Dhahran as a case study. The base case and green roof modelling of the selected building has been developed with the help of DesignBuilder software. The base case model has been validated with the help of 3-month measured data about the energy consumption without a green roof installed. The result shows that the energy consumption for the base case is 169 kWh/m 2 while the energy consumption due to the application of a green roof on the entire roof surface is 110 kWh/m 2 . For the three investigated green roof options, energy saving is found to be in the range of 24% to 35%. The economic evaluation based on the net present value (NPV) approach for 40 years with consideration to other environmental advantages indicates that the benefits of the green roof technology are realized towards the end of the life cycle of the building.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the post-occupancy evaluation (POE) of academic and research laboratory facilities. This is based on the premise that the performance of such facilities is directly connected to the productivity, health and wellbeing of its users. Design/methodology/approach The paper was carried out in two phases, first, the performance requirements for academic and laboratory facilities were identified through the extant literature. Furthermore, a questionnaire survey was developed to carry out a POE of existing academic and research laboratory facilities in a university campus in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire was designed using a Likert scale of one to five. Finally, the satisfaction index was computed, and rates of satisfaction with the various performance requirements were determined. Findings The paper resulted into 74 performance requirements grouped into three categories. The respondents showed general satisfaction with most of the performance requirements. However, dissatisfaction was observed in performance requirements related to technical features and the availability of sustainability features. Such findings suggest the growing importance of such technical and sustainable features in modern-day laboratories. Originality/value Though few studies have employed POE in assessing the performance of academic facilities, there is still a gap regarding its application to the laboratory facilities. Thus, the originality of this study is evident in its presentation of a set of performance requirements and its further application as a case study.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop a comprehensive list of key performance indicators (KPIs) that can be employed in determining the functional performance of academic and research laboratory facilities. Design/methodology/approach The study employed a two-phase approach. First, a thorough literature review was conducted to identify potential KPIs specific to the performance of laboratory facilities. This was followed by an assessment of the KPIs by 12 respondents including 6 professionals and 6 users. The KPIs were arranged in the form of a questionnaire survey containing response columns for agree/disagree, and importance rating scales for evaluation. The relative importance index values were also computed. Findings The result of the study was a comprehensive list of 161 KPIs classified into nine categories including: space, access/circulation, utilities and waste, environmental conditions, furniture, appearance/finishes/image, communications, storage within the space and special building features. These KPIs were perceived to be at varying levels of importance by the respondents. Originality/value Though previous studies developed KPIs for the performance of facilities, these KPIs are not universal. Thus, the originality of this study is in its identification of a comprehensive set of KPIs unique to the design, evaluation and management of research and academic laboratory facilities.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to establish key performance indicators (KPIs) that can be deployed in the evaluation and promotion of safety performance of building developer`s in NigeriaDesign/methodology/approach: A thorough review of the literature was performed to generally identify sets of KPIs used to evaluate the safety performances of building developer`s during construction. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with eleven (11) subject matter experts and professionals to ensure inclusion, validation and clarity of the indicators and to further provide agreement/disagreement, and importance ratings for the identified KPIs. The KPIs was grouped into appropriate categories, keeping out redundant KPIs, and ensuring KPIs are clear and measurable. The Relative Importance Index (RII) and Mean values were computed.Findings: Results from the study consist of 137 KPIs, grouped into 9 categories including: Planning, design and procurement, communication on & maintenance of effective safety behaviour, construction safety policy, construction safety personnel, management effort and support, safety training and enlightenment, administration of safety processes, investigation and reporting of accidents, and rewards and sanctions for project stakeholders.  These KPIs were observed to be at different levels of importance from the respondents. The following KPIs were considered based on their extreme importance judging from the respective RII values: communicating safety requirements to designer (98.18%), safety performance set as part of contractor selection criterion (96.36%), availability and accessibility of the relevant insurance policies (98.18%) and appropriate issuance of motivational directives by the top management (100%).Originality/value:  Many studies have been done in the past where KPIs as it relates to construction safety were identified. However, the specificity of these KPIs to countries other than Nigeria requires similar research be conducted to identify building developer safety performance KPIs for the Nigerian construction industry.