International Construction Specialty Conference of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (ICSC) (5th : 2015)

Overview of construction sustainability research products O’Connor, James T.; Torres, Neftali; Woo, Jeyoung Jun 30, 2015

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
52660-O'Connor_J_et_al_ICSC15_134_Construction_Sustainability.pdf [ 1.61MB ]
52660-O'Connor_J_et_al_ICSC15_134_Construction_Sustainability_slides.pdf [ 1.48MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 52660-1.0076353.json
JSON-LD: 52660-1.0076353-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 52660-1.0076353-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 52660-1.0076353-rdf.json
Turtle: 52660-1.0076353-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 52660-1.0076353-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 52660-1.0076353-source.json
Full Text
52660-1.0076353-fulltext.txt
Citation
52660-1.0076353.ris

Full Text

5th International/11th Construction Specialty Conference 5e International/11e Conférence spécialisée sur la construction    Vancouver, British Columbia June 8 to June 10, 2015 / 8 juin au 10 juin 2015   OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION SUSTAINABILITY RESEARCH PRODUCTS James T. O’Connor1, Neftali Torres2 and Jeyoung Woo1, 3 1 Dept. of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, USA 2 Fluor Corporation, USA 3 woo.jeyoung@utexas.edu Abstract: Much research has been conducted on capital project sustainability in the last two decades, but most of the findings only provide guidelines for its implementation during facility planning or design. This nearly exclusive focus on early project phases has left the industry with the need for more detailed guidance on implementing construction sustainability practices during jobsite execution. With this need in mind, the Construction Industry Institute (CII) chartered Research Team (RT) 304, "Sustainability Practices and Metrics for the Construction Phase of Capital Projects", to develop this missing practical guidance. This paper overviews the findings and products of the research team. The team developed a catalog of 54 Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) for onsite implementation during the construction phase to increase overall project sustainability. Each CPSA is characterized in terms of corresponding construction functions, potential sustainability impact, influence on project performance (i.e., cost, schedule, quality, and safety), ease of implementation, barriers to implementation, conditions that leverage benefits, and output metrics. The research team also developed two spreadsheet-based tools—the CPSA Screening Tool and the CPSA Implementation Index—to facilitate CPSA implementation during construction. The screening tool enables users to prioritize the 54 CPSAs according to project characteristics, while the index tool assesses CPSA implementation levels. Through its validation efforts, the team determined that the current level of CPSA implementation across the industry is at approximately 60 percent, and that this rate should increase with the regular use of the CPSA catalog, screening tool, and implementation index. INTRODUCTION As project teams seek to lessen the environmental impacts of their construction activities—water and electricity consumption, earth work, and wastes generated during demolition and construction, among others—they increasingly recognize the importance of construction sustainability techniques. More and more, owners, contractors, and other capital project stakeholders are looking for guidance and resources for conducting sustainable construction activities to improve their sustainability performance (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). In recent decades, researchers have developed much practical sustainability-related guidance for construction activities. One of the globally recognized sources of guidance is the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification program developed by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC). While this program has been widely implemented, it only offers sustainability objectives and recommendations in the planning and design phases of projects (USGBC 2009). Similar programs were developed by the City of New York Department of Design and Construction and the 134-1 Chicago Department of Aviation (City of NY DDC 1999 and CDA 2013). These examples also focused on early project phases.  To provide the industry with practical sustainability guidance for the construction phase, the Construction Industry Institute (CII) organized Research Team (RT) 304, "Sustainability Practices and Metrics for the Construction Phase of Capital Projects." This paper introduces the research products developed by CII RT 304, the Construction Phase Sustainability Action (CPSA) Catalog, the CPSA Screening Tool, and the CPSA Implementation Index. Examples of the construction phase sustainability activities presented in these products are temporary facility design and construction, and construction means and methods. 1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES The objectives of the research were (1) to provide practical sustainability guidance for construction field operations, (2) to develop a spreadsheet-based tool to support sustainability implementation during the construction, and (3) to provide sustainability metrics for benchmarking. Since these objectives addressed sustainability implementation during the construction-phase, the scope of the research extended from the contractor's initial set-up to the final commissioning report of a capital project, and sustainability activities during the planning or design phase were excluded. 2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Before proceeding to develop the objectives, the research team defined three key terms, i.e., construction sustainability, construction phase, and conventional project performance criteria. Construction sustainability was defined as "the processes, decisions, and actions during the construction phase of capital projects that enhance current and future environmental, social, and economic needs while considering project safety, quality, cost, and schedule." Construction phase was defined as "all fabrication/jobsite/field activities and decisions starting with construction/fabrication contracting and planning for site mobilization through to initial operations, final performance testing, and handover of the completed facility." Lastly, conventional project performance criteria were defined as "typical criteria for assessing a project’s success: safety, quality, cost, and schedule" (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). As illustrated in Figure 1, the research team reached alignment on the objectives and terms before conducting its literature review. After that the team developed the Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) Catalog and two spreadsheet-based tools—the CPSA Screening Tool and the CPSA Implementation Index. Finally, the team engaged a panel of external sustainability experts to validate these research products (CII 2014a). The following section provides detailed descriptions of each phase of the research. 2.1 Literature Review The research team examined the relevant literature in the following areas: sustainable development and sustainable construction; common sustainability models; sustainability drivers and barriers; corporate-level and project-level sustainability; advances in project-level sustainability practices; construction and demolition waste management; materials management and selection; construction site energy management and emission reduction; indoor air quality during construction; water consumption/quality during construction; and community and social aspects of sustainability. Due to the page limitations of this article, all detailed findings of the literature review can be found in Implementation Resource 304-2, "A Framework for Sustainability during Construction" (CII 2014a). While conducting the literature review, the research team was able to study a variety of construction sustainability opportunities and their impacts on construction sustainability performance, i.e., their improvement of economic, social, and environmental aspects of a project. However, most previous research was conducted in early phases of construction projects, such as planning or design. This finding showed the need for more detailed guidance and applicable strategies for construction-phase sustainability practices for owners, contractors, and other stakeholders. 134-2 Research TeamOrientation, Alignment, & PlanningLiterature ReviewConstruction Phase Sustainability Action (CPSA) Catalog DevelopmentCPSAs x Construction Function MapCPSA Implementation SurveyCPSA-Specific Implementation GuidanceConstr. Phase MetricsCPSA Screening ToolResearch Validation by Panel of External ExpertsConstruction Function OutlineConstruction Sustainability Process Figure 1. Research Methodology Overview (Adapted from CII 2014a and CII 2014b) 2.2 Development of Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) Catalog In order to fill the research gap as lacking of guidance on construction-phase sustainability practices, the research team developed the CPSA Catalog with optional 54 actions which enhance project sustainability during the construction phase. The preliminary CPSAs with construction sustainability practices were originated from literature review. Then the research team brainstormed to assemble industry sustainability practices and collected experts opinion on construction sustainability. The team also estimated sustainability impact magnitude of each CPSA implementation with five different levels as significantly positive impact, positive impact, negative impact, significantly negative impact, and minimal/negligible impact. Before finalizing the 54 CPSAs, the draft of CPSAs had been refined with multiple reviews by the research team (CII 2014a). Each catalog entry follows a template with the following information: CPSA title; primary construction function; secondary construction function; CPSA description; characterization of sustainability impacts; influence on conventional project performance criteria; ease of CPSA accomplishment/implementation; project conditions that leverage benefits from the CPSA; potential sustainability performance output metrics; barriers to successful implementation; and references (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). The team designed and modified the catalog throughout the course of numerous brainstorming sessions and workshops. The team was composed of 15 members, representing owners, contractors, design consultants, and equipment/material suppliers. The team's cumulative years of relevant industry experience was 316 years, with 21 years as the average amount of experience (CII 2014a).  2.3 Tools Development and Validation RT 304 developed the CPSA Screening Tool and the CPSA Implementation Index in four different phases: (1) conceptual, (2) detailed planning, (3) tool programming, and (4) testing/modifying. During the conceptual phase, the research team identified inputs, outputs, a logic, and an algorithm for the CPSA Screening Tool. During the detailed planning phase, the team developed the content of the introduction tabs, user guide tabs, input tabs, output tabs, and database tabs for computing, for both tools. Next, the team programmed the content into the tools, using Microsoft Excel software functions. Once the tools had been developed, they were distributed to the panel of external experts to test on specific projects, and the tools were modified according to the panel's comments and suggestions (CII 2014a). 134-3 3 PRODUCT OF THE RESEARCH This section describes the major characteristics of the research team’s three research products: the CPSA Catalog, the CPSA Screening Tool, and the CPSA Implementation Index.  3.1 54 CPSAs Catalog The research team developed 54 CPSAs for the CPSA Catalog to offer detailed guidance on construction sustainability implementation to owners, contractors, and other capital project stakeholders. Using the information provided in each CPSA, owners or project managers can decide whether to use sustainability activities to affect project performance. Figure 2 presents a sample image of CPSA No. 28. The entire CPSA Catalog can be found in CII Implementation Resource 304-2 (CII 2014a).  Figure 2. Typical CPSA Catalog Entry (Adapted from CII 2014a and CII 2014b) 134-4 3.1.1 CPSA Title and Primary Construction Function The team identified the following eight construction sustainability-related primary functions for the CPSA Catalog: (1) project management; (2) contracting; (3) field engineering; (4) site facilities and operations; (5) craft labor management; (6) materials management; (7) construction equipment management; and (8) quality management, commissioning, and handover (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). Table 2 categorizes the 54 CPSAs, first by primary sustainability impact, and then by the most affected project areas and resources. Around 60 percent of CPSAs are relevant to the Site Facilities & Operations, Project management, and Field Engineering. (CII 2014a) 3.1.2 Characterization of Sustainability Impacts The most affected areas and resources of each CPSA's sustainability impact was gathered from literature and research team brainstorming. The collected areas and resources were assigned to one sustainability impact area as one aspect among economic, social, and environmental. Table 1 presents the entire list of most affected areas and resources of each sustainable area. Table 1: Primary Sustainability Impacts of CPSA and the Most Affected Areas and Resources by CPSA  (Adapted from CII 2014a) Primary Sustainability Impact Most Affected Areas and Resources Environmental Energy consumption; Greenhouse gases: Criteria air pollutants; Indoor air quality; Water consumption; Water quality; Waste generation; Land use; Noise pollution; Odors; Light pollution; or Negligible effect Social Health and safety; Skills development; Community relationships; Local resource depletion; Community infrastructure; Traffic; Job creation; Tax revenue generation; Community service donations; or Negligible effect Economic Project fiscal impacts, or Negligible effect The tool prompts the user to indicate the most desirable sustainability impacts for a given project on a five-point scale. The research team also designed the tool to measure the positive impact of each CPSA on conventional project performance criteria, i.e., safety, quality, cost, and schedule objectives. 3.1.3 Ease of CPSA Implementation and Leveraging Benefits of CPSA Implementation The research team assessed the level of difficulty of each CPSA implementation as easy, moderate, or challenging, considering the required resources, expense, skill-sets, and time to implement. In addition to rating the ease of CPSA implementation, the team identified project conditions that leverage benefits from CPSA implementation, grouping them into seventeen categories. These leveraging conditions can be found in CII Implementation Resource 304-2 (CII 2014a). 3.1.4 Sustainability Performance Output Metrics and Barriers to Successful Implementation The research team identified output metrics for measuring the sustainability performance of each CPSA during its implementation, putting these metrics into nine categories. Moreover, the team examined barriers to each CPSA implementation to prepare project teams for potential challenges. The team grouped these barriers into the following five categories: lack of information; limited project resources; outside owner/contractor control; lack of infrastructure; and unfavorable site or project conditions. The full lists of output metrics and barriers can be found in CII Implementation Resource 304-2 (CII 2014a). 134-5 Table 2: Typical CPSAs according to Primary Construction Functions (Adapted from CII 2014a) Primary Construction Function CPSA Title Project Management 1. Leadership Team Staffing for Sustainable Projects 2. Community Social Responsibility Program 3. Contractor Sustainability and Recognition Program 4. Sustainability Provisions in Construction Execution Plans 5. Sustainability Risk Management 6. Stakeholder Engagement Plan 7. Site Work Hour Schedule to Reduce Traffic Impacts 8. Work Schedule to Reduce Electricity Impacts 9. Paperless Communication and Construction Documentation 10. Construction Team Sustainability Performance Assessment Contracting 11. Verification of Sustainability Claims and Ratings 12. Sustainability-friendly Project Delivery Method 13. Contractor Prequalification Based on Safety and  Sustainability Performance 14. Promotion of Local Employment and Skills Development 15. Sustainability Change Proposal Clause Field Engineering 16. Labor-intensive versus Equipment-intensive Approaches 17. Pre-assembly and Pre-fabrication of Construction Elements 18. Sequence and Route Planning for Project Transport 19. Minimization of Project's Footprint of Disruption 20. Sustainable Material Substitutions 21. Construction Noise/Vibration Abatement and Mitigation 22. Selective Demolition versus Conventional Demolition 23. Sustainable Large-scale Earthwork and Grading Operations 24. Reduction of Dunnage for Equipment Operations 25. Reusable Shoring, Formwork, and Scaffolding Site Facilities & Operations 26. Protection of Cultural Artifacts and Endangered Species 27. Protection of Trees and Vegetation 28. Sustainable Temporary Facilities 29. Sustainable Temporary Worker Camps 30. Source of Onsite Power 31. Site Energy Management 32. Energy-autonomous Pre-manufactured Reusable Facilities 33. Indoor Air Quality Improvements 34. Collection, Remediation, and Reuse of Gray water and Storm water 35. Environmentally-friendly Dust and Erosion Control 36. Construction and Demolition Waste Management 37. Collection, Sorting, and Recycling of Construction Wastes Craft Labor Management 38. Promotion of Local Workforce Preparedness 39. Expatriates versus Local Employment for Global Projects 40. Promote Community Harmony within Diverse Project Workforce Materials Management 41. Analysis of Local Materials/Services versus Non-local/Global Alliance 42. Reduction of Packaging Waste 134-6 Primary Construction Function CPSA Title 43. Material- and Equipment-handling Strategy 44. Sustainable Consumable Materials Management 45. Minimization of Material Surplus 46. Management of Surplus Materials Construction Equipment Management 47. Selection and Replacement of Construction Equipment 48. Right-sizing of Construction Equipment 49. Use of Full Transport/Equipment Capacity 50. Reduction in Idling of Construction Equipment 51. Inspection and Maintenance of Construction Equipment 52. Tire-cleaning of Roadworthy Vehicles Quality Management, Commissioning & Handover 53. Quality Management and Facility Start-up Planning 54. Sustainability Lessons Learned  3.2 CPSA Screening Tool The research team developed the Excel-based CPSA Screening Tool to help project managers or any capital project stakeholders select the most appropriate and relevant CPSAs. This tool utilizes user input about the project to screen for these relevant CPSAs from the total 54 CPSAs. It then ranks the selected CPSAs according to their likelihood of maximizing project sustainability performance. The first user inputs for the CPSA Screening Tool are project-specific sustainability objectives; the user determines the relative importance of environmental stewardship, social progress, and direct project economics. Next, the tool prompts the user to provide information about project characteristics. The output is the prioritized list of CPSAs. Figures 3 and 4 show the screenshot of the tool’s Input tab. Figure 5 presents the screenshot of the Output tab. (CII 2014a)  Figure 3. CPSA Screening Tool - Sustainability Priorities Tab (Adapted from CII 2014) 134-7  Figure 4. CPSA Screening Tool - Input Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a)  Figure 5. CPSA Screening Tool - Output Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a) Equation 1 presents the Relevance Index (RI), the tool’s prioritizing algorithm. The RI is the Impact Score (IS) times the Conditions Score (CS). The IS is the sum of the Project-specific Sustainability Priorities (PSP) times the Sustainability Impact Rating (SIR); these are shown in Section C of each CPSA sheet. (See the sample sheet in Figure 2.) The percentage of each sustainability priority entered in the Input tab of the tool is its PSP value, and the SIR value is defined as 0 when the SIR is “N,” 0.60 when the SIR is “+,” -0.60 when the SIR is “-,” 1.00 when the SIR is “++,”, and, lastly, -1.00 when the SIR is “--.” (CII 2014a) [1]  Relevance Index (RI) = Impact Score (IS) X Conditions Score (CS), where IS = Σ {(Project-specific Sustainability Priorities) X (Sustainability Impact Rating)} 134-8 The CS is determined by the number of leveraging conditions applicable to the project; it is 0.10 when there are zero CPSA leveraging condition, 0.33 when there is one leveraging condition, 0.67 when there are two leveraging conditions, 1.00 when there are three leveraging conditions. (CII 2014a) 3.3 CPSA Implementation Index To help project teams assess the sustainability performance of their projects, the research team developed CPSA Implementation Index. This tool’s numerical index score (out of 100 possible points) represents the project’s level of CPSA implementation. This score also allows project teams to compare projects for sustainability performance. As discussed above, the input for the CPSA Implementation Index is a rating of the extent of implementation of all 54 CPSAs. Figures 6 and 7 show screenshots of the tool’s Input and Output tabs, respectively. (CII 2014a)  Figure 6. CPSA Implementation Index - Input Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a)  Figure 7. CPSA Implementation Index - Output Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a) To compute the CPSA Index score, the tool allocates a maximum of 1.85 points for each CPSA implementation, with a total of 100 possible points. That is, the points allocated for each CPSA will be 1.85 when the extent of CPSA implementation is selected as “Full or Almost Full.” Further, when the extent selected is “Substantial,” the points awarded will be 1.23. When the extent selected is “Minimal,” the points will be 0.62. When the extent selected is “None or Almost None,” the points will be 0.00. (CII 2014a) 134-9 4 VALIDATION OF THE PRODUCT 4.1 54 CPSAs Catalog The research team distributed a survey to the review panel, to identify any missing content, to identify any items in need of correction, and to examine their current levels of CPSA application. The 33-member review panel was composed of research team members and external industry practitioners. They had an average of 26 years of industry experience (CII 2014a). The first section of the survey assessed background, e.g., years of industry experience, project role, primary industry sector, and company size, among other characteristics. The second section asked frequency of CPSA application to the project and likelihood of application of each CPSA to future projects. The respondents indicated that they would either sometimes or frequently apply around 41 CPSAs (75 percent) to their  projects; they also said that they were either somewhat or very likely to apply 53 CPSAs (98 percent) to their future projects (CII 2014a). 4.2 CPSA Screening Tool and CPSA Implementation Index The research team demonstrated the CPSA Screening Tool on a large mining project in Mexico, and demonstrated the CPSA Implementation Index on a large U.S. urban rail transit project. In this validation process, project managers from each project gave constructive and valuable feedback that the team used to modify the tools. The CPSA Implementation Index demonstration showed that the current level of CPSA implementation is 60 percent (CII 2014a). 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The industry’s need for practical guidance on construction-phase sustainability implementation motivated the research team to develop the Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) Catalog, the CPSA Screening Tool to prioritize relevant CPSAs for each project, and the CPSA Implementation Index to measure the level of CPSA implementation efforts. All three outputs were validated by selected experts in construction sustainability. The tool demonstrations showed that the current level of CPSA implementation is 60 percent. (CII 2014a) Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Construction Industry Institute (CII) for chartering this research project,  the members of CII Research Team 304 for their commitment and participation, and the survey participants for their valuable feedback. References Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA). 2013. Sustainable Airport Manual, Retrieved from http://www.airportsgoinggreen.org/documents/2013/CDA%20SAM%20v3.1%20-%20November%2012,%202013%20-%20FINAL.pdf (last accessed on March 27, 2015) City of New York DDC. 1999. High Performance Building Guidelines, Retrieved from http://www.nyc.gov/html/ddc/downloads/pdf/guidelines.pdf (last accessed on March 27, 2015) Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014a. Implementation Resource 304-2: A Framework for Sustainability during Construction, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX, USA. Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014b. Research Summary 304-1: Sustainability during Construction: Process and Actions, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX, USA. U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). 2009. LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, U.S. Green Building Council, Inc., Washington, DC, USA. 134-10  5th International/11th Construction Specialty Conference 5e International/11e Conférence spécialisée sur la construction    Vancouver, British Columbia June 8 to June 10, 2015 / 8 juin au 10 juin 2015   OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION SUSTAINABILITY RESEARCH PRODUCTS James T. O’Connor1, Neftali Torres2 and Jeyoung Woo1, 3 1 Dept. of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, USA 2 Fluor Corporation, USA 3 woo.jeyoung@utexas.edu Abstract: Much research has been conducted on capital project sustainability in the last two decades, but most of the findings only provide guidelines for its implementation during facility planning or design. This nearly exclusive focus on early project phases has left the industry with the need for more detailed guidance on implementing construction sustainability practices during jobsite execution. With this need in mind, the Construction Industry Institute (CII) chartered Research Team (RT) 304, "Sustainability Practices and Metrics for the Construction Phase of Capital Projects", to develop this missing practical guidance. This paper overviews the findings and products of the research team. The team developed a catalog of 54 Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) for onsite implementation during the construction phase to increase overall project sustainability. Each CPSA is characterized in terms of corresponding construction functions, potential sustainability impact, influence on project performance (i.e., cost, schedule, quality, and safety), ease of implementation, barriers to implementation, conditions that leverage benefits, and output metrics. The research team also developed two spreadsheet-based tools—the CPSA Screening Tool and the CPSA Implementation Index—to facilitate CPSA implementation during construction. The screening tool enables users to prioritize the 54 CPSAs according to project characteristics, while the index tool assesses CPSA implementation levels. Through its validation efforts, the team determined that the current level of CPSA implementation across the industry is at approximately 60 percent, and that this rate should increase with the regular use of the CPSA catalog, screening tool, and implementation index. INTRODUCTION As project teams seek to lessen the environmental impacts of their construction activities—water and electricity consumption, earth work, and wastes generated during demolition and construction, among others—they increasingly recognize the importance of construction sustainability techniques. More and more, owners, contractors, and other capital project stakeholders are looking for guidance and resources for conducting sustainable construction activities to improve their sustainability performance (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). In recent decades, researchers have developed much practical sustainability-related guidance for construction activities. One of the globally recognized sources of guidance is the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification program developed by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC). While this program has been widely implemented, it only offers sustainability objectives and recommendations in the planning and design phases of projects (USGBC 2009). Similar programs were developed by the City of New York Department of Design and Construction and the 134-1 Chicago Department of Aviation (City of NY DDC 1999 and CDA 2013). These examples also focused on early project phases.  To provide the industry with practical sustainability guidance for the construction phase, the Construction Industry Institute (CII) organized Research Team (RT) 304, "Sustainability Practices and Metrics for the Construction Phase of Capital Projects." This paper introduces the research products developed by CII RT 304, the Construction Phase Sustainability Action (CPSA) Catalog, the CPSA Screening Tool, and the CPSA Implementation Index. Examples of the construction phase sustainability activities presented in these products are temporary facility design and construction, and construction means and methods. 1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES The objectives of the research were (1) to provide practical sustainability guidance for construction field operations, (2) to develop a spreadsheet-based tool to support sustainability implementation during the construction, and (3) to provide sustainability metrics for benchmarking. Since these objectives addressed sustainability implementation during the construction-phase, the scope of the research extended from the contractor's initial set-up to the final commissioning report of a capital project, and sustainability activities during the planning or design phase were excluded. 2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Before proceeding to develop the objectives, the research team defined three key terms, i.e., construction sustainability, construction phase, and conventional project performance criteria. Construction sustainability was defined as "the processes, decisions, and actions during the construction phase of capital projects that enhance current and future environmental, social, and economic needs while considering project safety, quality, cost, and schedule." Construction phase was defined as "all fabrication/jobsite/field activities and decisions starting with construction/fabrication contracting and planning for site mobilization through to initial operations, final performance testing, and handover of the completed facility." Lastly, conventional project performance criteria were defined as "typical criteria for assessing a project’s success: safety, quality, cost, and schedule" (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). As illustrated in Figure 1, the research team reached alignment on the objectives and terms before conducting its literature review. After that the team developed the Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) Catalog and two spreadsheet-based tools—the CPSA Screening Tool and the CPSA Implementation Index. Finally, the team engaged a panel of external sustainability experts to validate these research products (CII 2014a). The following section provides detailed descriptions of each phase of the research. 2.1 Literature Review The research team examined the relevant literature in the following areas: sustainable development and sustainable construction; common sustainability models; sustainability drivers and barriers; corporate-level and project-level sustainability; advances in project-level sustainability practices; construction and demolition waste management; materials management and selection; construction site energy management and emission reduction; indoor air quality during construction; water consumption/quality during construction; and community and social aspects of sustainability. Due to the page limitations of this article, all detailed findings of the literature review can be found in Implementation Resource 304-2, "A Framework for Sustainability during Construction" (CII 2014a). While conducting the literature review, the research team was able to study a variety of construction sustainability opportunities and their impacts on construction sustainability performance, i.e., their improvement of economic, social, and environmental aspects of a project. However, most previous research was conducted in early phases of construction projects, such as planning or design. This finding showed the need for more detailed guidance and applicable strategies for construction-phase sustainability practices for owners, contractors, and other stakeholders. 134-2 Research TeamOrientation, Alignment, & PlanningLiterature ReviewConstruction Phase Sustainability Action (CPSA) Catalog DevelopmentCPSAs x Construction Function MapCPSA Implementation SurveyCPSA-Specific Implementation GuidanceConstr. Phase MetricsCPSA Screening ToolResearch Validation by Panel of External ExpertsConstruction Function OutlineConstruction Sustainability Process Figure 1. Research Methodology Overview (Adapted from CII 2014a and CII 2014b) 2.2 Development of Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) Catalog In order to fill the research gap as lacking of guidance on construction-phase sustainability practices, the research team developed the CPSA Catalog with optional 54 actions which enhance project sustainability during the construction phase. The preliminary CPSAs with construction sustainability practices were originated from literature review. Then the research team brainstormed to assemble industry sustainability practices and collected experts opinion on construction sustainability. The team also estimated sustainability impact magnitude of each CPSA implementation with five different levels as significantly positive impact, positive impact, negative impact, significantly negative impact, and minimal/negligible impact. Before finalizing the 54 CPSAs, the draft of CPSAs had been refined with multiple reviews by the research team (CII 2014a). Each catalog entry follows a template with the following information: CPSA title; primary construction function; secondary construction function; CPSA description; characterization of sustainability impacts; influence on conventional project performance criteria; ease of CPSA accomplishment/implementation; project conditions that leverage benefits from the CPSA; potential sustainability performance output metrics; barriers to successful implementation; and references (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). The team designed and modified the catalog throughout the course of numerous brainstorming sessions and workshops. The team was composed of 15 members, representing owners, contractors, design consultants, and equipment/material suppliers. The team's cumulative years of relevant industry experience was 316 years, with 21 years as the average amount of experience (CII 2014a).  2.3 Tools Development and Validation RT 304 developed the CPSA Screening Tool and the CPSA Implementation Index in four different phases: (1) conceptual, (2) detailed planning, (3) tool programming, and (4) testing/modifying. During the conceptual phase, the research team identified inputs, outputs, a logic, and an algorithm for the CPSA Screening Tool. During the detailed planning phase, the team developed the content of the introduction tabs, user guide tabs, input tabs, output tabs, and database tabs for computing, for both tools. Next, the team programmed the content into the tools, using Microsoft Excel software functions. Once the tools had been developed, they were distributed to the panel of external experts to test on specific projects, and the tools were modified according to the panel's comments and suggestions (CII 2014a). 134-3 3 PRODUCT OF THE RESEARCH This section describes the major characteristics of the research team’s three research products: the CPSA Catalog, the CPSA Screening Tool, and the CPSA Implementation Index.  3.1 54 CPSAs Catalog The research team developed 54 CPSAs for the CPSA Catalog to offer detailed guidance on construction sustainability implementation to owners, contractors, and other capital project stakeholders. Using the information provided in each CPSA, owners or project managers can decide whether to use sustainability activities to affect project performance. Figure 2 presents a sample image of CPSA No. 28. The entire CPSA Catalog can be found in CII Implementation Resource 304-2 (CII 2014a).  Figure 2. Typical CPSA Catalog Entry (Adapted from CII 2014a and CII 2014b) 134-4 3.1.1 CPSA Title and Primary Construction Function The team identified the following eight construction sustainability-related primary functions for the CPSA Catalog: (1) project management; (2) contracting; (3) field engineering; (4) site facilities and operations; (5) craft labor management; (6) materials management; (7) construction equipment management; and (8) quality management, commissioning, and handover (CII 2014a and CII 2014b). Table 2 categorizes the 54 CPSAs, first by primary sustainability impact, and then by the most affected project areas and resources. Around 60 percent of CPSAs are relevant to the Site Facilities & Operations, Project management, and Field Engineering. (CII 2014a) 3.1.2 Characterization of Sustainability Impacts The most affected areas and resources of each CPSA's sustainability impact was gathered from literature and research team brainstorming. The collected areas and resources were assigned to one sustainability impact area as one aspect among economic, social, and environmental. Table 1 presents the entire list of most affected areas and resources of each sustainable area. Table 1: Primary Sustainability Impacts of CPSA and the Most Affected Areas and Resources by CPSA  (Adapted from CII 2014a) Primary Sustainability Impact Most Affected Areas and Resources Environmental Energy consumption; Greenhouse gases: Criteria air pollutants; Indoor air quality; Water consumption; Water quality; Waste generation; Land use; Noise pollution; Odors; Light pollution; or Negligible effect Social Health and safety; Skills development; Community relationships; Local resource depletion; Community infrastructure; Traffic; Job creation; Tax revenue generation; Community service donations; or Negligible effect Economic Project fiscal impacts, or Negligible effect The tool prompts the user to indicate the most desirable sustainability impacts for a given project on a five-point scale. The research team also designed the tool to measure the positive impact of each CPSA on conventional project performance criteria, i.e., safety, quality, cost, and schedule objectives. 3.1.3 Ease of CPSA Implementation and Leveraging Benefits of CPSA Implementation The research team assessed the level of difficulty of each CPSA implementation as easy, moderate, or challenging, considering the required resources, expense, skill-sets, and time to implement. In addition to rating the ease of CPSA implementation, the team identified project conditions that leverage benefits from CPSA implementation, grouping them into seventeen categories. These leveraging conditions can be found in CII Implementation Resource 304-2 (CII 2014a). 3.1.4 Sustainability Performance Output Metrics and Barriers to Successful Implementation The research team identified output metrics for measuring the sustainability performance of each CPSA during its implementation, putting these metrics into nine categories. Moreover, the team examined barriers to each CPSA implementation to prepare project teams for potential challenges. The team grouped these barriers into the following five categories: lack of information; limited project resources; outside owner/contractor control; lack of infrastructure; and unfavorable site or project conditions. The full lists of output metrics and barriers can be found in CII Implementation Resource 304-2 (CII 2014a). 134-5 Table 2: Typical CPSAs according to Primary Construction Functions (Adapted from CII 2014a) Primary Construction Function CPSA Title Project Management 1. Leadership Team Staffing for Sustainable Projects 2. Community Social Responsibility Program 3. Contractor Sustainability and Recognition Program 4. Sustainability Provisions in Construction Execution Plans 5. Sustainability Risk Management 6. Stakeholder Engagement Plan 7. Site Work Hour Schedule to Reduce Traffic Impacts 8. Work Schedule to Reduce Electricity Impacts 9. Paperless Communication and Construction Documentation 10. Construction Team Sustainability Performance Assessment Contracting 11. Verification of Sustainability Claims and Ratings 12. Sustainability-friendly Project Delivery Method 13. Contractor Prequalification Based on Safety and  Sustainability Performance 14. Promotion of Local Employment and Skills Development 15. Sustainability Change Proposal Clause Field Engineering 16. Labor-intensive versus Equipment-intensive Approaches 17. Pre-assembly and Pre-fabrication of Construction Elements 18. Sequence and Route Planning for Project Transport 19. Minimization of Project's Footprint of Disruption 20. Sustainable Material Substitutions 21. Construction Noise/Vibration Abatement and Mitigation 22. Selective Demolition versus Conventional Demolition 23. Sustainable Large-scale Earthwork and Grading Operations 24. Reduction of Dunnage for Equipment Operations 25. Reusable Shoring, Formwork, and Scaffolding Site Facilities & Operations 26. Protection of Cultural Artifacts and Endangered Species 27. Protection of Trees and Vegetation 28. Sustainable Temporary Facilities 29. Sustainable Temporary Worker Camps 30. Source of Onsite Power 31. Site Energy Management 32. Energy-autonomous Pre-manufactured Reusable Facilities 33. Indoor Air Quality Improvements 34. Collection, Remediation, and Reuse of Gray water and Storm water 35. Environmentally-friendly Dust and Erosion Control 36. Construction and Demolition Waste Management 37. Collection, Sorting, and Recycling of Construction Wastes Craft Labor Management 38. Promotion of Local Workforce Preparedness 39. Expatriates versus Local Employment for Global Projects 40. Promote Community Harmony within Diverse Project Workforce Materials Management 41. Analysis of Local Materials/Services versus Non-local/Global Alliance 42. Reduction of Packaging Waste 134-6 Primary Construction Function CPSA Title 43. Material- and Equipment-handling Strategy 44. Sustainable Consumable Materials Management 45. Minimization of Material Surplus 46. Management of Surplus Materials Construction Equipment Management 47. Selection and Replacement of Construction Equipment 48. Right-sizing of Construction Equipment 49. Use of Full Transport/Equipment Capacity 50. Reduction in Idling of Construction Equipment 51. Inspection and Maintenance of Construction Equipment 52. Tire-cleaning of Roadworthy Vehicles Quality Management, Commissioning & Handover 53. Quality Management and Facility Start-up Planning 54. Sustainability Lessons Learned  3.2 CPSA Screening Tool The research team developed the Excel-based CPSA Screening Tool to help project managers or any capital project stakeholders select the most appropriate and relevant CPSAs. This tool utilizes user input about the project to screen for these relevant CPSAs from the total 54 CPSAs. It then ranks the selected CPSAs according to their likelihood of maximizing project sustainability performance. The first user inputs for the CPSA Screening Tool are project-specific sustainability objectives; the user determines the relative importance of environmental stewardship, social progress, and direct project economics. Next, the tool prompts the user to provide information about project characteristics. The output is the prioritized list of CPSAs. Figures 3 and 4 show the screenshot of the tool’s Input tab. Figure 5 presents the screenshot of the Output tab. (CII 2014a)  Figure 3. CPSA Screening Tool - Sustainability Priorities Tab (Adapted from CII 2014) 134-7  Figure 4. CPSA Screening Tool - Input Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a)  Figure 5. CPSA Screening Tool - Output Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a) Equation 1 presents the Relevance Index (RI), the tool’s prioritizing algorithm. The RI is the Impact Score (IS) times the Conditions Score (CS). The IS is the sum of the Project-specific Sustainability Priorities (PSP) times the Sustainability Impact Rating (SIR); these are shown in Section C of each CPSA sheet. (See the sample sheet in Figure 2.) The percentage of each sustainability priority entered in the Input tab of the tool is its PSP value, and the SIR value is defined as 0 when the SIR is “N,” 0.60 when the SIR is “+,” -0.60 when the SIR is “-,” 1.00 when the SIR is “++,”, and, lastly, -1.00 when the SIR is “--.” (CII 2014a) [1]  Relevance Index (RI) = Impact Score (IS) X Conditions Score (CS), where IS = Σ {(Project-specific Sustainability Priorities) X (Sustainability Impact Rating)} 134-8 The CS is determined by the number of leveraging conditions applicable to the project; it is 0.10 when there are zero CPSA leveraging condition, 0.33 when there is one leveraging condition, 0.67 when there are two leveraging conditions, 1.00 when there are three leveraging conditions. (CII 2014a) 3.3 CPSA Implementation Index To help project teams assess the sustainability performance of their projects, the research team developed CPSA Implementation Index. This tool’s numerical index score (out of 100 possible points) represents the project’s level of CPSA implementation. This score also allows project teams to compare projects for sustainability performance. As discussed above, the input for the CPSA Implementation Index is a rating of the extent of implementation of all 54 CPSAs. Figures 6 and 7 show screenshots of the tool’s Input and Output tabs, respectively. (CII 2014a)  Figure 6. CPSA Implementation Index - Input Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a)  Figure 7. CPSA Implementation Index - Output Tab (Adapted from CII 2014a) To compute the CPSA Index score, the tool allocates a maximum of 1.85 points for each CPSA implementation, with a total of 100 possible points. That is, the points allocated for each CPSA will be 1.85 when the extent of CPSA implementation is selected as “Full or Almost Full.” Further, when the extent selected is “Substantial,” the points awarded will be 1.23. When the extent selected is “Minimal,” the points will be 0.62. When the extent selected is “None or Almost None,” the points will be 0.00. (CII 2014a) 134-9 4 VALIDATION OF THE PRODUCT 4.1 54 CPSAs Catalog The research team distributed a survey to the review panel, to identify any missing content, to identify any items in need of correction, and to examine their current levels of CPSA application. The 33-member review panel was composed of research team members and external industry practitioners. They had an average of 26 years of industry experience (CII 2014a). The first section of the survey assessed background, e.g., years of industry experience, project role, primary industry sector, and company size, among other characteristics. The second section asked frequency of CPSA application to the project and likelihood of application of each CPSA to future projects. The respondents indicated that they would either sometimes or frequently apply around 41 CPSAs (75 percent) to their  projects; they also said that they were either somewhat or very likely to apply 53 CPSAs (98 percent) to their future projects (CII 2014a). 4.2 CPSA Screening Tool and CPSA Implementation Index The research team demonstrated the CPSA Screening Tool on a large mining project in Mexico, and demonstrated the CPSA Implementation Index on a large U.S. urban rail transit project. In this validation process, project managers from each project gave constructive and valuable feedback that the team used to modify the tools. The CPSA Implementation Index demonstration showed that the current level of CPSA implementation is 60 percent (CII 2014a). 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The industry’s need for practical guidance on construction-phase sustainability implementation motivated the research team to develop the Construction Phase Sustainability Actions (CPSAs) Catalog, the CPSA Screening Tool to prioritize relevant CPSAs for each project, and the CPSA Implementation Index to measure the level of CPSA implementation efforts. All three outputs were validated by selected experts in construction sustainability. The tool demonstrations showed that the current level of CPSA implementation is 60 percent. (CII 2014a) Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Construction Industry Institute (CII) for chartering this research project,  the members of CII Research Team 304 for their commitment and participation, and the survey participants for their valuable feedback. References Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA). 2013. Sustainable Airport Manual, Retrieved from http://www.airportsgoinggreen.org/documents/2013/CDA%20SAM%20v3.1%20-%20November%2012,%202013%20-%20FINAL.pdf (last accessed on March 27, 2015) City of New York DDC. 1999. High Performance Building Guidelines, Retrieved from http://www.nyc.gov/html/ddc/downloads/pdf/guidelines.pdf (last accessed on March 27, 2015) Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014a. Implementation Resource 304-2: A Framework for Sustainability during Construction, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX, USA. Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014b. Research Summary 304-1: Sustainability during Construction: Process and Actions, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX, USA. U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). 2009. LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations, U.S. Green Building Council, Inc., Washington, DC, USA. 134-10  Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products Authors James T. O’Connor, P.E., Ph.D. Neftali Torres Jeyoung Woo  The University of Texas at Austin  Date June 9, 2015 This presentation is based on the research outputs by Research Team 304 supported by the Construction Industry Institute [The CSCE International Construction Specialty Conference 2015] Who Wants to be …   More Sustainable? Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 2 Contents q   Introduction q   Research Objectives q   Research Methodology q   Research Products §  CPSA Catalog §  CPSA Screening Tool §  CPSA Implementation Index q   Conclusions q   Acknowledgements and References Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 3 Introduction: NEED Design phase ? Construction phase (USGBC 2013) [Source] - U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) (2013). “LEED Reference Guide for Building Design and Construction.” 2013 edition, Washington, DC -  Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA) (2013). “Sustainable Airport Manual” retrieved from http://www.airportsgoinggreen.org/documents/2013 •  Guidance and resources for sustainable construction activities (CDA  2013) VOLUMINOUS NEEDED RT	  304	  Construc/on	  Sustainability	  (Period: 2012 – 2014) Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 4 Research Objectives •  Scope: Construction-phase on capital projects        (from site mobilization to turnover to the owner) •  Objectives (CII 2014) (1) To provide practical sustainability guidance for construction field operations (2) To develop tools to support sustainability implementation during the construction (3) To provide sustainability metrics for benchmarking Guidance for construction-phase sustainability practices [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 5 Research Methodology Research Team Orientation, Alignment,  & Planning Literature Review Construction Phase Sustainability Action (CPSA)  Catalog Development Construction Function Outline CPSA  Construction Function Map CPSA Implementation Survey CPSA-Specific  Implementation Guidance Construction Sustainability  Process CPSA  Screening Tool Construction Phase Metrics Research Validation by Panel of External Experts •  Research methodology (CII 2014) [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Research Products (Research summary, Implementation resource, and Research report) Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 6 Research Methodology •  Definitions by the research team (CII 2014) –  Construction sustainability: … enhance current and future environmental, social, and economic performance  –  Construction phase: … starting with site mobilization to handover to the owner –  Conventional project performance criteria: Typical criteria for assessing a project’s success •  Development of a catalog of CPSAs (CII 2014)  [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Literature Review (Construction Sustainability Practices) A catalog of CPSAs (Action characterizations) Reviews	  Brainstorming Sustainability impact Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 7 Research Products: CPSAs Number of CPSAs in the primary construction function (adapted from CII 2014) [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. 1210 106 653 202468101214Site Facilities & OperationsProject ManagementField EngineeringMaterials ManagementConstruction Equipment ManagementContractingCraft Labor ManagementQuality Management,Commissioning & HandoverNumbers (n=54)Primary construction functionOverview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 8 Research Products: CPSA Catalog Image of the CPSA catalog (adapted from CII 2014) 1)  CPSA Number and title 2)  Construction functions 3)  Description 4)  Sustainability impacts 5)  Influence on project performance criteria 6)  Ease of implementation 7)  Project conditions that leverage benefits 8)  Sustainability output metrics 9)  Common barriers to implementation 10)  References [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 9 Research Products: CPSA Screening Tool •  To select the most appropriate and relevant CPSAs (CII 2014) •  Inputs −  Weighted priorities for sustainability −  Project characteristics •  Output −  Rank-order of CPSAs [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Input tabs Output tab Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 10 Research Products: CPSA Screening Tool [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Output tab (adapted from CII 2014) Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 11 Research Products: CPSA Implementation Index •  To assess the sustainability performance (CII 2014) •  Input −  Extent of CPSA Implementation •  Outputs −  CPSA Implementation Index −  59 metrics (7 categories) associated with impacts from CPSA [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Input tab Output tab Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 12 Conclusions •  Construction-phase sustainability implementation •  CPSA Implementation Index demonstration: −  Current level of CPSA implementation is 60% (CII 2014) CPSA Catalog CPSA Screening Tool CPSA Implementation Index To prioritize relevant CPSAs To assess the level of CPSA implementation 54 Construction-Phase Sustainability Actions Practical guidance on construction-phase sustainability implementation [Source] - Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. Overview of Construction Sustainability Research Products 13 Acknowledgements and References •  Acknowledgements –  Construction Industry Institute (CII) –  CII Research Team 304 –  Survey respondents •  References –  Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA) (2013). “Sustainable Airport Manual” retrieved from http://www.airportsgoinggreen.org/documents/2013/CDA%20SAM%20v3.1%20-%20November%2012,%202013%20-%20FINAL.pdf (last accessed on May 10, 2015) –  Construction Industry Institute (CII) 2014. “A Framework for Sustainability during Construction.” CII Implementation Resource 304-2, Austin, TX, USA. –  U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) (2013). “LEED Reference Guide for Building Design and Construction.” 2013 edition, Washington, DC, USA. Thank you. Contact information   1) James T. O’Connor, P.E., Ph.D.   - Professor, C.T. Wells Professorship in Project Management   - Dept. of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering   - The University of Texas at Austin, TX. USA    2) Neftali Torres   - Project Engineer, FLUOR Corporation   - Former M.S. student at The University of Texas at Austin    3) Jeyoung Woo   - Ph.D. student at The University of Texas at Austin   - woo.jeyoung@utexas.edu 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.52660.1-0076353/manifest

Comment

Related Items