Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
A Natural Ventilation Alternative to the Passivhaus Standard for a Mild Maritime Climate
Previous Article in Journal
Theoretical and Experimental Investigation of a Heat Exchanger Suitable for a Hybrid Ventilation System
Previous Article in Special Issue
Achieving Cost Benefits in Sustainable Cooperative Housing
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Buildings 2013, 3(1), 39-60;

Framework for Detailed Comparison of Building Environmental Assessment Tools

Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Department of Urban Studies, School of Architecture and the Built Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Drottning Kristinas väg 30, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
Department of Building Energy and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, University of Gävle, SE-801 76 Gävle, Sweden
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 20 December 2012 / Accepted: 9 January 2013 / Published: 17 January 2013
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Design and Construction)
Full-Text   |   PDF [650 KB, uploaded 17 January 2013]   |  


Understanding how Building Environmental Assessments Tools (BEATs) measure and define “environmental” building is of great interest to many stakeholders, but it is difficult to understand how BEATs relate to each other, as well as to make detailed and systematic tool comparisons. A framework for comparing BEATs is presented in the following which facilitates an understanding and comparison of similarities and differences in terms of structure, content, aggregation, and scope. The framework was tested by comparing three distinctly different assessment tools; LEED-NC v3, Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH), and EcoEffect. Illustrations of the hierarchical structure of the tools gave a clear overview of their structural differences. When using the framework, the analysis showed that all three tools treat issues related to the main assessment categories: Energy and Pollution, Indoor Environment, and Materials and Waste. However, the environmental issues addressed, and the parameters defining the object of study, differ and, subsequently, so do rating, results, categories, issues, input data, aggregation methodology, and weighting. This means that BEATs measure “environmental” building differently and push “environmental” design in different directions. Therefore, tool comparisons are important, and the framework can be used to make these comparisons in a more detailed and systematic way. View Full-Text
Keywords: green building design; sustainable building; environmental assessment tool; LEED; code for sustainable homes; ecoeffect green building design; sustainable building; environmental assessment tool; LEED; code for sustainable homes; ecoeffect

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Wallhagen, M.; Glaumann, M.; Eriksson, O.; Westerberg, U. Framework for Detailed Comparison of Building Environmental Assessment Tools. Buildings 2013, 3, 39-60.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Buildings EISSN 2075-5309 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top