Acceptance and Use of LCC as a Decision Support Tool for Renovation Investments

Gluch, Pernilla; Gustafsson, Mathias Petter

doi:10.1061/9780784479377.095

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The question arises whether or not the adoption of LCC really is as slow as claimed, or if there is a discrepancy between the way researchers idealistically picture how LCC should be used and practitioners' ways of using LCC in practice. In a recent study about construction clients it was in fact found that the vast majority used LCC within their organization (Gluch & Gustafsson, 2015), which agrees with the interview observations made by Olsson et al (2015). However, Olsson et al (2015) found a large variation in the way LCC was used.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…TAM explains the adoption of various types of technical systems and applications (Davis, 1989) and has been used to explain tool uptake in various types of contexts, such as office tools, software tools and business application tools, as well as various technological systems and applications (see review in Legris, Ingham, & Collerette, 2003). TAM has in a previous study been found useful for describing and understanding factors influencing LCC use (Gluch & Gustafsson, 2015). In brief, TAM explores external influence, perceived usability, attitudes towards use and intention to use.…”

Section: Questionnaire Survey Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

Gluch

Gustafsson

Baumann

et al. 2018

International Journal of Strategic Property Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Real estate-and property owners' rationales behind the adoption of Life Cycle Costing (LCC) respectively how LCC is actually used in renovation projects, is investigated through empirical data from a questionnaire survey sent to managers in Swedish real estate organisations. The study shows a positive attitude towards LCC. It is perceived to as a flexible and multi-functional tool with a familiar monetary format. Nevertheless, the study also reveals simplistic and undeveloped views of how to use LCC. While much research has focused on developing sophisticated LCC tools, the findings indicate that practitioners' interest in these refinements seems limited. The importance of understanding that LCC is used in a context of multiple and partly competing institutional logics of renovation is emphasised. The paper contributes to a more informed research in development of LCC tools as well as better informed LCC use among real estate and property owners.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Questionnaire Survey Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

Gluch

Gustafsson

Baumann

et al. 2018

International Journal of Strategic Property Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…LCC can therefore, significantly define the success of a project as it incorporates all the costs associated with the project through life. Literature further evidences the diverse applications of LCC including its ability to perform as a decision support tool (Meng and Harshaw, 2013;Gluch and Gustafsson, 2015;Minhas and Potdar, 2020), enhance sustainability (Caplehorn, 2012;Alaloul et al, 2021), and ensure value for money (Swaffield and McDonald, 2008). However, majority of research on LCC concerns tool modelling and development, and surprisingly few studies pay interest into how practitioners perceive the usefulness of the tools developed (Goh and Sun, 2016).…”

Section: Life Cycle Costing In Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Costing in Construction: Current Trends and Emerging Directions

Manewa¹,

Siriwardena²,

Wijekoon³

2021

Proceedings of the 9th World Construction Symposium 2021 on Reshaping Construction: Strategic, Structural and Cultural Transfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current construction climate in the UK is moving forward with a much greater attention on cost certainty, sustainability and adoption of innovative technologies. The UK Construction Strategy 2025 provides a clear direction towards achieving such goals by 2025. Life Cycle Costing (LCC) is one of successful techniques for identifying the total cost of ownership in construction assets. Even though the technique has 50 years of history, the application and the diffusion of the technique within the construction domain is comparatively limited. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the evolution and current status of LCC within construction context through Bibliometric Analysis of journal publications indexed in Web of Science database (1970-2020). A series of Contents Analyses was performed and visualisation maps were generated via VOSviewer. The findings proved that LCC has been absorbed into construction in late 90’s and there is a continuous rise in the global uptake from 2013 onwards. With limited budgets and growing demand for sustainability, an integrated methodology linking LCC, Life Cycle Assessment and Performance optimisation is apparently the way forward for LCC.

show abstract

“…OPERA-MILP is based on mixed integer linear programming (MILP) and was first developed at the Division of Energy Systems in Linköping University during the 1980s. The software has been used for studying both multi-family buildings (Gluch & Gustafsson, 2015;Gustafsson, 1990Gustafsson, , 2000Gustafsson, , 2001, and also one heritage single-family building (Broström et al, 2014).…”

Section: Life Cycle Cost Optimization -Opera-milpmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic approach for major renovation of residential buildings

Liu

2017

Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Sweden, buildings are responsible for about 40 % of total energy use and about 10 % of total CO 2 emissions. Today more than 60 % of existing Swedish residential buildings are over 40 years old and are in need of major renovation. In addition, 15 % of all multi-family buildings and 27 % of all single-family houses were built before 1945. The increased energy use and threat from CO 2 emissions of the building sector create a need for energy efficiency. The important role that renovation of residential buildings will play in reducing the total energy used by the Swedish building sector as well as in reducing primary energy use and CO 2 emissions on both the national and global levels has been the impetus for the studies included in this thesis.The aim of the current research is to develop a methodology from a system perspective which can be used to analyze the energy use, optimal life cycle cost (LCC), energy efficiency measure (EEM) package, indoor environment, CO 2 emissions, and primary energy use of a building or a community during major renovation. The developed methodology accomplished at three different levels, i.e. building level, cluster level and district level. The methodology considers both energy efficiency and economic viability during building renovation and will also play an important role in overall urban planning. The studied buildings include both nonlisted and listed residential buildings and the tools used include building energy simulation (BES), survey, technical measurements, LCC optimization and building categorization.The results show that the combination of BES, technical measurements and surveys provides a holistic approach for evaluation of energy use and indoor environment of the studied residential buildings. The results from the current study also show that the 2020 energy target, i.e., reduction of energy use by 20 %, for the building sector can be achieved by all the studied building types and that the total LCC of these buildings are below the cost-optimal point. In comparison, the 2050 energy target, i.e., reduction of energy use by 50 %, for the building sector may be achieved by the non-listed buildings, but when the constraints relevant to listed buildings are added the cost-optimality changes as some EEMs in direct conflict with the building's heritage value may not be implemented.The investigation of primary energy use and CO 2 emissions by the residential buildings show that the higher the energy saving, the lower the primary energy use becomes, and vice versa. With the same energy saving, the heating system with higher primary energy factor results in higher primary energy use. From a CO 2 emissions point of view, EEM packages proposed to help buildings connected to a CHP based district heating system, to reduce the energy use or LCC are not consistently effective. Since these EEM packages will reduce district heating demand, the electricity produced in the CHP plant will also decrease. When the biomass is considered a limited resource, measures such as investm...

show abstract

Acceptance and Use of LCC as a Decision Support Tool for Renovation Investments

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

Life Cycle Costing in Construction: Current Trends and Emerging Directions

A systematic approach for major renovation of residential buildings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About