MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3031985534 · doi:10.71781/3017

Limits and opportunities of integrated design in sustainable buildings : the need for a more comprehensive project process

2019· dissertation· en· W3031985534 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ricardo Leoto

Notice bibliographique

RevueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésProcess (computing)EngineeringDesign processArchitectural engineeringSystems engineeringConstruction engineeringProcess managementComputer scienceWork in processOperations management

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The quest to reduce national and global environmental impacts has had a significant impact on the construction industry. In most developed countries, the construction sector is responsible for 35% of waste generation, 32% of energy consumption, and 19% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Both theory and practice show that the traditional silo-type, linear, and fragmented design process is a significant barrier to innovation and the implementation of better practices in the built environment. Integrated Design (ID) is increasingly seen in Canada and abroad as a potential solution to the lack of collaboration and innovation. Contrary to the traditional design process, ID allows all participants to work together from the beginning of the project, making decisions collectively and integrating otherwise fragmented products and processes. Although ID’s potential is theoretically well-founded, there is little empirical evidence of its effectiveness. The objective of this dissertation is to examine – from both theoretical and empirical vantage points – the scope, strengths, limitations, and critical success factors of Integrated Design (ID) in creating sustainable buildings. The research is based on three case studies of recent building projects in Montreal that implemented Integrated Design processes. The analysis of over 350 architectural plans, press releases and documents produced during construction and operation phases, life cycle analyses, and 28 in-depth interviews allowed us to understand the processes involved, the outcomes obtained, and the stakeholders’ interest and expectations regarding ID. Findings reveal that ID enhanced collaboration and innovation, and helped to reduce buildings’ impacts when compared to the traditional processes. But ID failed to achieve its full potential. It did not completely reduce fragmentation between stakeholders and project phases. This research identified that a “wall” between design, construction and operation phases still exists in ID. As it is applied today, ID continues to underestimate the value of effective performance measurements, rigorous project feedback, and systematic post-occupation evaluations. Identifying the gaps between expectations and effective practice, this dissertation reveals areas where improvements are still needed in the building industry. The study suggests, for instance, that project managers and the design team can (and should) assume new roles, liabilities and responsibilities for project outputs. Effective carbon reductions will require that stakeholders develop deeper knowledge of life-cycle assessment and energy simulation tools. New contractual arrangements between stakeholders will also be needed to favour sustained stakeholder commitment to achieve positive outcomes during the entire project life cycle. From a theoretical point of view, the results demonstrate the relevance and usefulness of ID, but also identify its limits and the conditions that allow for the creation of value for all stakeholders and improvements in buildings. The gaps between theory and practice found here reveal the urgent need to change construction industry regulation (such as professional liability, traditional price-driven - lowest bidding - selection procedures, labeling building systems, building codes, standards, and certifications) in order to reduce buildings’ impacts and slow climate change. From a practical point of view, the results highlight ways in which stakeholders in the construction industry can improve interactions among themselves to reduce buildings’ impacts on the environment. All of this can help – and is needed to – create buildings that are more appropriate for today’s society and future generations.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,663
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,948

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,070
Tête enseignante GPT0,333
Écart entre enseignants0,263 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOpen MINDMême sujetSustainable Building Design and AssessmentTravaux en français237 207