A paradigm shift towards Whole Life Analysis in adaptable buildings

Economic evaluation is a significant consideration in the initiation of a facility. This evaluation process should take into account all costs, benefits and performance associated with a facility in its through life cycle. There are a number of techniques available for economic valuation, however, the practical application is poor in most of the techniques. Whole Life Analysis (WLA) is identified as a comprehensive approach for economic evaluation. At present there is a growing trend towards designing buildings to be more adaptable within the UK property market. Hence, economic evaluation of adaptable buildings needs to be undertaken as early as possible for appropriate long term decisions. This paper examines the paradigm shift required for a WLA approach for adaptable buildings while identifying the benefits and barriers of its practical application. A comprehensive literature review was undertaken to analyse how WLA could be used as a decision support technique for adaptable buildings. Literature reveals WLA as one of the best decision support techniques for use in the building industry, and it seems logical to adopt it for adaptable buildings. However, detailed economic evaluation remains an untapped area within adaptable buildings. Being involved in the ‘Adaptable Futures’ research project at Loughborough University, the authors have blended their thoughts with available literature and attempt to identify how important in undertaking WLA is for an adaptable facility while identifying the barriers of current applications. Stakeholder input is crucial towards the betterment of WLA particularly concerning its understanding and application in adaptable buildings. Key words: economic evaluation, whole life analysis, adaptable buildings, barriers, benefits, stakeholders’ role

[1]  Ian Ellingham,et al.  New Generation Whole-Life Costing: Property and Construction Decision-Making Under Uncertainty , 2006 .

[2]  Alphonse J. Dell'Isola,et al.  Life Cycle Costing for Design Professionals , 1981 .

[3]  Ghassan Aouad,et al.  Whole-life costing in construction: A state of the art review , 2003 .

[4]  David Kincaid,et al.  Adaptability potentials for buildings and infrastructure in sustainable cities , 2000 .

[5]  W. B. Taylor,et al.  The use of life cycle costing in acquiring physical assets , 1981 .

[6]  Reginald B. H. Tan,et al.  Evaluation of Life Cycle Cost Analysis Methodologies , 2002 .

[7]  Keith Hutchinson,et al.  Sustainable construction: some economic challenges , 2000 .

[8]  R. P. Geraedts,et al.  Design for Change; Flexibility Key Performance Indicators , 2008 .

[9]  Graham Ive Re-examining the costs and value ratios of owning and occupying buildings , 2006 .

[10]  Stewart Brand,et al.  How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They're Built , 1997 .

[11]  E. Sarah Slaughter,et al.  Design strategies to increase building flexibility , 2001 .

[12]  Yosef S. Sherif,et al.  An optimal maintenance model for life cycle costing analysis , 1982 .

[13]  Kirsten Arge,et al.  Adaptable office buildings: theory and practice , 2005 .

[14]  Richard Kirkham,et al.  Whole Life-Cycle Costing: Risk and Risk Responses , 2003 .

[15]  Rosalie T. Ruegg,et al.  Building Economics: Theory and Practice , 1990 .

[16]  Roger Flanagan,et al.  Whole Life Appraisal for Construction , 2005 .

[17]  Stephen Kendall,et al.  Residential Open Building , 2000 .

[18]  Srinath Perera,et al.  Cost Studies of Buildings , 2004 .

[19]  Stephen Kendall,et al.  Open Building: An Approach to Sustainable Architecture , 1999 .