A framework for combining risk-management and performance-based building approaches

Abstract

Models and frameworks used for managing construction projects are typically inspired in business 'cultures' that prevail within industrial contexts. The conceptual backgrounds of quality, performance, and risk environments are explored to ascertain whether these 'cultures' can complement each other. A new general approach towards Risk-Managed Performance-Based Building (RM-PBB) is presented, including the principles and inputs used for designing and implementing an RM-PBB framework. Such a framework envisages the fulfilment of end-users' (society and individuals) and other interested parties' requirements relating to the building product, as well as the agile interaction between and within the building, manufacturing, property, and capital and insurance markets, at both national and international levels.Les modèles et les cadres utilisés pour gérer les projets de construction trouvent habituellement leur inspiration dans les « cultures » d'entreprise qui prévalent dans les contextes industriels. Les arrière-plans conceptuels en matière de qualité, de performance et de milieux à risques sont examinés afin d'établir si ces « cultures » peuvent être complémentaires les unes des autres. Il est présenté une nouvelle approche générale visant à une Construction Performancielle à Risques Maîtrisés, incluant les principes et les apports utilisés pour l'élaboration et la mise en oeuvre d'un cadre de référence performanciel dans le bâ timent. Un tel cadre permet d'envisager la satisfaction des exigences des utilisateurs finaux (société et individus) comme des autres parties intéressées par rapport à ce produit qu'est le bâ timent, ainsi qu'une souplesse d'interaction entre et au sein des marchés du bâ timent, de la production, de l'immobilier, des capitaux et des assurances, aussi bien au niveau national qu'au niveau international.

The building performance gap: Are modellers literate?

“…More particularly, there is a lack of attention to aspects related to insulation and airtightness. 2,4,27 In many cases, both builders and engineers are responsible for the resultant discrepancy in buildings performance, but studies have not been able to identify nor quantify the exact source of the gap.…”

Analytical Hierarchy Process for Developing a Building Performance-Risk Rating Tool

“…The construct indicators were initially compiled from the existing performance and green rating tools and also precedent research relating to building performance [2], [7], [8], [10]- [12], [17], [26]- [29].…”

“…Risk approach advocates principles on the level of building performance and predicts the impact on society that is ultimately affected by the sources of risk. Therefore, risks in building performance can be framed as a health risk, safety risk, environmental risk, economic risk as well as political risk and others [7], [11], [23]. To suit with the aspects of building performance in Malaysian HEBs, health risk and safety risk become the main focus of this research.…”

“…To optimise the performance of HEB, it should avoid allocating the occupants, visitors and passers-by at risk [6]. Several studies have shown that poor building performance presents vulnerability of risk towards the safety and health of building users [2], [7]- [13]. This demonstrates the significance of addressing risk in the building performance evaluation.…”

“…It denotes the comparison of client's goals and performance criteria against actual building performance, measured both subjectively and objective. Building performance has been defined in BS 5240 as "behaviour of a product in use" [7], [19]. It is also described as a process of assessing progress towards achieving goods and services efficiency, quality of building outputs and effectiveness of building operations [20].…”