Vantages of Certification of Sustainable Construction Vanessa Lucas Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Departamento de Engenharia Civil Monte de Caparica, Portugal vanessa.s.lucas@gmail.com Miguel P. Amado Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Departamento de Engenharia Civil Monte de Caparica, Portugal ma@fct.unl.pt ABSTRACT: Growing concerns about the uncontrolled increment of the natural resources consumption, the way they are used, the high pollutant emissions that they originate and high production of waste resulting from human activities, impose the study and implementation of measures that help to ensure a sustainable future for the planet. Once the construction sector is a major responsible to the environmental context is necessary developed a new process to make construction sustainable. To ensure and facilitate the application of this process became necessary to evaluate the sustainable construction. The emergence of voluntary evaluation and certification systems of construction has enabled the evaluation of the level of sustainability achieved in buildings, requiring the introduction of the principles of sustainability all over the life cycle of building, improving the quality level of performance of buildings. On the other hand, the evaluation systems help allow the development of plans and projects that improve the sustainability of the sector and intend, through certification, distinguish buildings with good sustainable practices. The evaluation and certification systems while volunteers are in constant evolution expanding their field of application, grant that many countries have a need to develop a proper system of evaluation of the sustainability of construction according to the local reality. So the study of various systems of evaluation and certification constitute a most widely basis for the construction of a system directed at the local level. Keywords: Construction, Sustainability, Evaluation and Certification Systems 1 INTRODUCTION Over the years the world population has increased considerably. Currently, there are around 6,900 million people on the planet and it is expected that this number will reach 9,150 million by 2050 (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2010). Population growth will require more consumption of resources caused by the need to build more homes that respond to the needs caused by this growth. These facts will lead to negative consequences for the environment and consequently to the development process of societies (Ding, 2007). The preoccupation with natural resources and the way they are used in society, particularly in construction, have been growing (Meadows & Randers, 2004). These preoccupations have prompted reflection, from which came the need to introduce sustainable concepts applicable to different sectors of our society (Brundtland, 1987). The construction sector is one that consumes more natural resources and is also one of the largest generators of solid waste giving rise to the need to find new materials and construction techniques (Teodoro & Henriques, 2011). In order to reverse this trend of environmental disarticulation (increased resource consumption, emissions, deteriorating health and biodiversity), Charles Kibert proposed a "new" concept adaptable to construction, called the Sustainable Construction, defining it as "the creation and responsible management of a healthy built environment, taking into account ecological principles (to avoid environmental damage) and efficient use of resources" (Kibert, 1994, 2008). So, this new concept was the main preoccupation to help preserving the environment, respecting natural resources and quality of human life. Sustainable construction adopts, in the process, the principles of sustainable development to minimize the use of the planet's natural resources and aims to develop methods that protect the environment and ensuring the protection and survival of ecosystems, taking into account the progress technological. 2 SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION EVALUATION The environmental assessment applied to the construction started towards the end of the 80’s. This type of evaluation aims to assess the negative and positive impacts that the construction might have on the environment, developing further measures to minimize negative environmental impacts and valuation of positive (Pinheiro, 2006). The development of environmental impact assessment involves the creation of specific criteria in order to reduce and assess the environmental impact caused by the construction. However, it was observed that in many countries that have developed projects in order to minimize this impact, the means used to verify that the buildings met the criteria were not sufficient (Bragança, 2005). As a result, many buildings they had in mind the preservation of the environment when analysing the life cycle had higher energy consumption compared to the construction of the current solution (Anink, Boonstra & Mak, 1996). Advances in environmental evaluation, in respect of building works began in the consensus among researchers and government activities, and accepted certification systems as one of the most efficient methods for the improvement of buildings regarding its environmental performance. This step in developing the environmental evaluation was instrumental in the formulation of guidelines and methods for sustainable construction and its quality criteria and methods of evaluation and verification (Cole, 2005), leading to the fulfilment of various methods and systems for the evaluation of Sustainable Construction, that even today remain voluntary, but they offer advantages in all areas that influence the buildings’ construction. 3 CERTIFICATION OF SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION The necessity to implement mechanisms that ensure compliance of construction with regard to sustainable processes, arises due to the fact that many countries had developed projects to minimize environmental impact, had no means to verify that the projects meet the objectives they were assigned (Bragança, 2005). As a result, there was the need for measures such as certification in order to assess and enforce procedures and systems related to the future sustainability of the construction sector. Certification is a process performed by an external entity, independent, accredited or holder of the brand that can issue a document that verifies the conformity of a product, process or service, with the benchmark and standards, to the area in question. The certification aims to recognize buildings that contribute to a sustainable future, through the construction of buildings taking into account economic, environmental and social aspects (Cole, 2005). Want to be recognized level of performance practices and processes of sustainable construction and requires the introduction of the principles of sustainability throughout the building life cycle (Seo et al., 2006), improving the quality in performance of buildings. 4 ADVANTAGES OF THE EVALUATION AND CERTIFICATION OF SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION The process of assess and certify sustainable construction aims to stimulate, advise and encourage the market for practices that enhance environmental protection. The evaluation and certification of sustainable construction promote the minimization of the negative effects of the buildings in their areas, aim to encourage a healthy and comfortable indoor environment and contribute to minimizing the use of natural resources in order to contribute to an effective sustainable development (Kaatz et al. 2006). Some of the objectives of assess and certify sustainable construction are: to differentiate the buildings with less environmental impact, encourage the use of best environmental practices in all phases of the lifecycle of the building (Seo et al., 2006), to create parameters that are not imposed in the legislation and highlight the importance and benefits of buildings with lower environmental impact to owners, users, designers and operators. So the evaluation and certification of sustainable construction want also encourage the creation of environmentally responsible attitude and profitable buildings, and healthy places to live and work. 4.1 Contribution to the sustainability of the sector The process of assess and certify sustainable construction aims to encourage good practice in construction, in order to preserve the environment, enhance quality of life and the built environment (Cole, 2005). It aims to help the development of projects and plans that respect the level of sustainability of the project and construction during their life cycle and management of works in various stages of construction and operation (Cooper, 1999). In order to contribute to sustainability in construction, are evaluated some concepts considered as key: acoustic comfort, thermal comfort, air quality, the link with the social context of the building envelope, the impact of environmental stressors, impact on the external environment, promoting the image of the building and its proper integration into the environment, environmental management of the building process in all his phases and efficient use of resources. 4.2 Contribution to the efficiency of the process The evaluation and certification of sustainable construction has principle to achieve the efficiency of the construction process and simultaneously enable the achievement of a high level of efficiency of the construction solutions adopted in buildings (Clements-Croome, 2004). It’s intended that the construction be based on a sustainable process monitored at all stages of the life cycle of the building (Amado, 2007), to ensure that the principles of sustainability are always assured. So, sustainability will be observed from the stage of project design, the efficiency of the method of construction, use and maintenance of buildings in a sustainable manner by those who inhabit them. This process of assess and certify allows the specification of areas of sustainability that has good building practices and practices to improve, a situation that is monitored through the monitoring process. 5 CURRENT EVALUATION SYSTEMS The assessment systems are designed to be easily incorporated by designers and the market in general, they have a simple structure, usually formatted as a checklist and linked to some kind of performance certification (Fossati, 2008). The creation of evaluation systems for specific buildings has enabled the certification of sustainability in construction. These systems are constantly evolving and expanding its scope. A major objective now is to "develop and implement an agreed methodology that serves as a support to the design of sustainable buildings that can be, simultaneously, transparent and flexible enough so that it can be easily adapted to different types of buildings and the constant evolution of technology that exists in the construction field " (Amado et al, 2009). For a better understanding of evaluation systems, it’s important to present some of the systems implemented in several countries, being the most relevant nowadays, namely: BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) Developed in the United Kingdom in the 90's, arises as the primary method of evaluating the environmental performance of buildings (Baldwin, Leach, Doggart & Attenborgough, 1990). This system provides not only guidelines to minimize the negative effects of buildings in their areas and aims to foster a healthy and comfortable indoor environment, addressing issues related to energy, environment, health, productivity, opportunities for improvement and financial benefits (Baldwin, Yates, Howard & Rao, 1998). CASBEE (Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Efficiency) This system was developed in Japan, based on two categories: one for new buildings and another for the existing building. The system has two aspects: the lifting / balancing between positive and negative impacts during the life cycle of building; and defining limits of the building analyzed. It also has the distinction of developing a concept referred to as closed ecosystems in order to determinate the environmental efficiency by relating the environment of the building in the study with public external environment (JBC, 2001). GBC (Green Building Challenge) The GBC was initially developed by Canada and later by an international consortium and designated by GBTool. It aims the development of an environmental performance of buildings evaluation method, with a view to their suitability for different technologies, building traditions and cultural values of different regions of the same country or from different countries (Cole & Larsson, 2000). SBTool (Sustainable Building Tool) The SBTool methodology was based on GBTool Method and was developed by iiSBE (International Initiative for Sustainable Built Environment), through the participation of several countries. This methodology aimed at creating a system to evaluate performance of buildings at the international level, but making an adjustment prior to the country context where it's applied. SBTool methodology has been used for development of several regional assessment tools like SBToolPT (Portugal), SBToolCZ (Czech Republic), Protocollo ITACA (Italy) and GREEN (Spain) (SBTool, 2007; Bragança, 2005). HQE (Haute Qualité Environnementale des Bâtiments) Evaluation system developed in France, with the following principles: reducing the impacts of buildings on the outside environment globally, regionally and locally and create an indoor comfortable for the users (Pinheiro, 2006). The structure of this system is subdivided into management of enterprise and environmental quality, being composed by the following evaluation areas: eco-construction, management, comfort and health (Silva, 2007). LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) Developed by United States Green Building Council (USGBC), in the United States of America, aiming the development and implementation of practices of project and construction environmentally responsible to encourage the creation of environmentally efficient buildings and healthy places to live and work (Meisel, 2010; U. S Green Building Council, 2010; LEED, 2009). This system is the most recognized worldwide and is present in 41 different countries, undergoing successive updates to its members. LIDERA (System Volunteer for Evaluation of Sustainable Construction) The LIDERA is a voluntary evaluation and recognition system of sustainable construction and built environment, developed in Portugal and aims to support the development of plans and projects seeking sustainability: evaluate the level of sustainability in various stages of the building, support management during the construction phase and operate and certification through an independent evaluation (LIDERA, 2009). NABERS (National Australian Buildings Environmental Rating System) The NABERS arises in Australia, with the peculiarity of having developed an online project that allows the possibility of self-evaluation and global and by area classification on sustainability level. This self-evaluation is done through questionnaire available on the website. This system addresses issues such as Energy, Land, Materials, Water, Internal Environment, Waste, Resources and Transportation (Vieira & Barros Filho, 2009; NABERS, 2010). 5.1 Structure of assessment systems: areas of evaluation, parameters of evaluation and weights The evaluation systems existing despite being built on a common basis differ from each other, essentially determined by the following reasons: levels of concerns about the environmental aspects vary from one country to another, the design and construction practices are different, climatic conditions, latitude, social and economic aspects are different and the receptivity of markets to the introduction of methods and measures are different (Silva et al. 2003; Fossati, 2008). The search for sustainability in the field of assessment of buildings has been characterized by structural transformation and operational requirements of the assessment methods (Cole, 2005), since some of systems have their priority focus on the environmental assessment while others seek to evaluate the sustainability of buildings (Cooper, 1999). Table 1 summarizes the requirements that constitute the basic structure of each system evaluation presented, as well as their relevance. Table 1 - Areas, parameters and weightings of the evaluation systems Evaluation Systems Areas of Evaluation Management Health and Wellbeing Energy Transport BREEAM Water Materials Waste CASBEE Land Use and Ecology Pollution Innovation Indoor Environment Quality of Service Outdoor Environment on Site Energy Resources & Materials SBTool Off-site Environment Energy and Resource Consumption Environmental Loadings Indoor Environmental Quality Service Quality Social and Economic aspects Site Selection, Project Planning and Parameters of Evaluation Weighting (%) Aspects global of policy and environmental procedures 12 Internal and external environment of the building 15 Operational energy and CO2 emissions Location of the building and CO2 emissions related to transportation Consumption and leakage Environmental implications of materials selection Resource efficiency by effective management and proper construction waste 19 8 6 12,5 10 Pollution of air and water, excluding CO2 Innovation in the field of sustainability Sound and Acoustics; Thermal Comfort; Lighting & Illumination; Air Quality Service Ability; Durability & Reliability; Flexibility & Adaptability 10 10 Building Thermal Load; Natural Energy Utilization; Efficiency in Building Service System; Efficient Operation Water Resources; Reducing Usage of Non-renewable Resources; Avoiding the Use of Materials with Pollutant Content Consideration of Global Warming; Consideration of Local Environment; Consideration of Surrounding Environment BREEAM, 2008 7,5 Directing of urban growth; Ecological value of site Preservation & Creation of Biotope; Townscape & Landscape; Local Characteristics & Outdoor Amenity References 20 15 15 20 CASBEE, 2008 15 15 Water, Energy, Land and Materials 23 Emissions, Effluents and Solid Waste 27 Air quality, Ventilation, Illumination and Comfort 18 Flexibility, Adaptability, User controllability, Outside spaces and Impacts on adjacent properties 16 Socio-Economic aspects 5 Planning of the construction, Verification, Pre-delivery and Planning of the operation 8 SBTool, 2007 Development Cultural and Perceptual Aspects Ecoconstruction HQE Management Comfort Health Sustainable Sites Water Efficiency Energy & Atmosphere LEED Materials & Resources Indoor Environmental Quality Innovation in Design Regional Priority Land Natural Ecosystems Landscapes and Patrimony Energy LIDERA Water Materials Food Products Effluent Air Emissions Waste Outside Sound IllumineThermal Pollution Culture and Patrimony Relation of the building with its surroundings; Choose Integrated Product; Construction Systems and Processes; Construction with low environmental impact Energy Management, Water Management, Waste Management of use and operation of the building; Maintenance (remaining environmental performance) Hygrothermal, Acoustic, Visual, Olfactory Sanitary quality of the environment; Air Quality; Water Quality Construction Activity Pollution Prevention; Site Selection; Development Density and Community Connectivity; Brownfield Redevelopment; Alternative Transportation-Public Transportation Access; Alternative Transportation-Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms; Alternative Transportation-LowEmitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles; Alternative Transportation-Parking Capacity; Site Development-Protect or Restore Habitat ; Site Development-Maximize Open Space; Storm water Design-Quantity Control; Heat Island Effect-Roof; Heat Island Effect-Nonroof; Light Pollution Reduction Water Use Reduction; Water Efficient Landscaping; Innovative Wastewater Technologies; Water Use Reduction Fundamental Commissioning of Building Energy Systems; Minimum Energy Performance; Fundamental Refrigerant Management; Optimize Energy Performance; On-site Renewable Energy; Enhanced Commissioning; Enhanced Refrigerant Management; Measurement and Verification; Green Power Storage and Collection of Recyclables; Building Reuse-Maintain Existing Walls, Floors and Roof; Building Reuse-Maintain Interior Non-structural Elements; Construction Waste Management; Materials Reuse; Recycled Content; Regional Materials; Rapidly Renewable Materials; Certified Wood Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance; Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control; Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring; Increased Ventilation; Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan-During Construction; Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan-Before Occupancy; LowEmitting Materials-Adhesives and Sealants; Low-Emitting Materials-Paints and Coatings; Low-Emitting Materials-Flooring Systems; Low-Emitting Materials-Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products; Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control; Controllability of Systems-Lighting; Controllability of Systems-Thermal Comfort; Thermal Comfort-Design Thermal Comfort-Verification; Daylight and Views-Daylight; Daylight and Views-Views 3 - 23,6 9,1 31,9 12,7 5,5 Regional Priority 3,6 Territorial Enhancement; Environmental Optimization of the Implantation 7 Valorisation ecological, Habitat Interconnection 5 Thermal effects (heat island) and luminous LEED, 2009 13,6 Innovation in Design; LEED Accredited Professional Local Landscape Integration; Protection and Valorisation of Patrimony Energetic Certification, Passive Design, Carbon Intensity (and efficiency) Consumer of potable water, Management of local waters Durability, Local materials, Low-impact materials Local food production Treatment of residual waters; Reuse flow of waste water Flow of Air Emissions - Particles and / or substances with acidifying potential (Emission of other pollutants: SO2 and NOx) Production of waste; Management of hazardous waste; Recycling of waste Fonts sound to the outside Silva, 2007 2 17 8 5 2 3 2 3 3 1 LIDERA, 2009 Air Quality Thermal Comfort Illumination and Acoustic Access for All Lifecycle Costs Local Economic Diversity Amenities and Social Interaction Participation and Control Environmental Management Innovation Land Materials Energy NABERS Water Indoor Environmental Resources Transport Wastes Levels of Air Quality 5 Thermal comfort 5 Illumination levels, sound insulation / sound levels 5 Access to public transport, Low impact mobility, Inclusive solutions Low life cycle costs Flexibility - Adaptability to the uses; Economic Dynamics; Local Labour Local amenities; Interaction with the community Capacity Control; Governance and Participation; Control of natural risks - Safety; Control of human threats - Security Conditions of use the environment; Environmental Management Systems Innovations Biodiversity Environmental impact of materials used in building Energy consumption during construction and operation of building Consumption and pollution of waters; Reuse of rainwater 5 2 4 4 4 6 2 16 7 17 7 Indoor air quality 13 Efficiency of resources Access to public transport in order to reduce air pollution Emissions to the environment 10 17 13 Vieira & Barros Filho, 2009 Although there are differences between the systems, they are needed, since each country has different performance levels. Therefore, there is an adjustments need, such as provision of higher or lower requirements with regard to water, reduce or increase the importance given to the wood; set the conditions for acoustic and thermal isolation and lighting for the reality of each country; adjust the ways of calculating the energy balance; specifications regarding the determination of CO2 emissions and energy recovery. However, these adjustments aren’t made only between the various systems in different countries. It was developed an evaluation criterion which focuses on the importance for regional evaluation of buildings, this means that, in the same country, different regions have different realities, in terms of social and cultural aspects, land occupation, climate or even on the construction practices level. This ensures the establishment of different evaluation parameters and performances of their specific needs (Sev, 2008). The areas on the internal environment, Environmental Loading and External Environmental Impact as well as resources, are the highest number of parameters. It is concluded that the environmental component is more important when compared with the planning, social and political components (Bragança, 2005). For the internal environment, the various systems provide special attention to this area because it’s focused on thermal comfort, acoustics, lighting, hydrothermal, olfactory and visual of the building, as well as aspects related to air quality, internal ventilation and health, which are essential to quality of life of the user inside the building (Spiegel & Meadows, 1999; Thormark, 2001). With regard to the areas related to socio-economic and political, innovation, environmental management and planning aspects, not all systems provide parameters evaluated in these areas. On the other hand, there are systems that attach particular importance to these areas, such as the LIDERA in the socio-economic and political area, and the case of LEED, the environmental management area. The planning is one of the areas that presented a lower number of parameters and should be developed by the various systems. The planning is essential to contribute to a planned, organized, and studied future, with products and technologies adapted to the construction. The area of innovation is also poorly developed and very few systems analyze it and only the BREEAM, LEED and LIDERA systems have parameters in the evaluation area. In sum, it can be concluded that the areas that bring together a larger number of parameters analyzed by certification systems are the area of the internal environment, then the areas of resources, environmental loading and external environmental impact, environment integration, environmental management, planning, socio-economic and political and, finally, innovation. 6 ADEQUACY TO LOCAL REALITY All evaluation systems analyzed in the previous item share the same goal: to stimulate market demand for sustainable buildings with better performance (Fossati, 2008). However, the analysis allowed the determination of the most important parameters and to fit the local situation, i.e., the Portuguese context. The most important parameters were defined according to: the state of development of the country, socio-economic aspects, social and cultural climate, environmental concerns, construction practices and project and state of the housing stock. The parameters were structured according to five factors: 1) Comfort, 2) Local Environment, 3) Management, 4) Project and Planning, and 5) Resources. Table 2 - Adequacy of evaluation parameters to local reality Factor COMFORT LOCAL ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT AND PLANNING RESOURCES Areas of Evaluation Parameters of Evaluation Acoustic Comfort Hygrothermal and Thermal Comfort Lighting Comfort Internal Environment Visual Comfort Indoor Air Quality Internal Ventilation Healthy Environment Amenities and Social Interaction Access for All Socio-Economic and Lifecycle Costs Political Model Local Economic Diversity Participation and Control Effluent Environmental Atmospheric Emissions Loading and Impact on the Surroundings and External Spaces External Environmental Impact on Local Ecology Impact Illumine-Thermal Pollution External Environment Environment Land Use Integration Public Transport and Smooth Mobility Recycled Content Waste Control of Use of Building Environmental Control of Construction Waste Management Climate Control Systems Reuse of Materials Innovation Innovation and Design Process Adaptability, Durability and Flexibility Planning Planning the Operation of the Building and Construction Water Conservation and Efficiency Water Water Recycling Efficiency of Building Systems Energy Conservation Energy Renewable Energy Materials Materials – Durability e Reuse Materials of Low Impact Priority for Local Delivery Weighting (%) 15 7 5 3 18 3 7 18 14 10 For the weights of the different parameters, these are an important component in assessing the sustainability of the building, because the balance between each parameter and its relation with the other is evident to a greater or lesser preoccupation with the various principles of sustainability (Lee et al, 2002). The above table also illustrates, the weightings assigned to each area of sustainability that constitute the system, given the adaptability to the Portuguese context and the type of concerns that the construction sector considers the most important evidence. The decision of assign more weight (18%) to water is resulting from the importance that this element has in terms of sustainability compared to the overall context of population growth and the consequent need for new buildings. The same way, the environmental management meets the same weight for the resources handled in the construction sector. 7 CONCLUSIONS In the last years, climate change caused by human interference in the environment are increasingly evident, sustainable buildings intended to be one of the alternatives that can positively impact on the reduction of these changes. As the construction sector responsible for much environmental degradation, it became necessary to promote knowledge of the performance of the processes and practices of sustainable building by implementing evaluation and certification systems of construction. Systems evaluation and certification of sustainable construction are intended to assess the conformity of the techniques and processes of construction, in order to contribute to the sustainable development of societies. These systems are constantly developing by various institutions and governments, especially in countries with adherence to environmental treaties and protocols. Regarding evaluation and certification systems for sustainable construction, many countries have chosen to develop their own certification systems applied to your local situation. The study of each system has given the opportunity to compare them according to their evaluation parameters, in order to enable useful comparisons for the knowledge of processes and techniques used in the certification of buildings, which enabled the identification of strategies and most determinants factors. It might be concluded that, in general, the certification systems analyzed give more importance to the environment when compared with the planning, social and politic component. These tend to focus on aspects related with the comfort and welfare of users, with protection of the environment, the impacts of construction on surrounding and with the natural resources. By analyzing the various systems of evaluation and certification in the different countries of the world, it was possible to select the parameters most relevant to the Portuguese reality and their weights in order to promote the use of technology and methods construction with lower environmental impact in the process construction, thus ensuring the sustainability of the whole process. 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY Amado, M.P.; Pinto, A.J.; Santos, C.V; Cruz, A. 2007. The Sustainable Building Process. In CD: Ron Wakefield (eds): RMIT University, Australia. págs.65. ISBN: 978-1-921166-68-6 Amado, M. P. et al. 2009. Relatório de Candidatura à Concessão de Terrenos em Cacuaco – Angola, págs.324. Cunha e Irmãos, SARL, Luanda. Anink, D.; Boonstra, C.; Mak, J. – Handbook of Sustainable Building, an Environmental Preference Method for Selection of Materials for Use in Construction and Refurbishment. London, UK : James & James Limited, 1996. págs. 176. ISBN: I-873936-38-9 Baldwin, R.; Leach, S.J.; Doggart, J. V.; Attenborgough, M. P. 1990. An Environmental Assessment for New Office Designs – BRE Report. IHS BRE Press, Bracknell, Berkshire. págs.19. ISBN:9780851254586 Baldwin, R.; Yates, A.; Howard, N.; Rao, S. 1998. BREEAM 98 for offices: an environmental assessment method for office buildings – BRE Report. IHS BRE Press, Bracknell, Berkshire. págs.56. ISBN: 9781860812385 Bragança, L. 2005. Princípios de desempenho e metodologias de avaliação da sustentabilidade das construções. Universidade do Minho, Alzurém, Guimarães. págs.3 Brundtland, G. 1987. Our common future: The world commission on environment and development, págs.400. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. Clements-Croome, D.,. Intelligent Buildings Design, Management and Operation. Thomas Telford. 2004, London. Cole, R. J. Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and roles. Building Research and Information, v. 35, n. 5, págs. 455.467, 2005. Cole, R. J.; Larsson, N. 2000. Green Building Challenge: Lessons Learned from GBC´98 and GBC2000, Proceedings: International Conference Sustainable Building 2000, págs.4. Maastricht. The Netherlands. Cooper, I., 1999. Which focus for building assessment – environmental performance or sustainability? Building Research and Information 27 (4/5), págs 321–331. Ding, G.K.C. Sustainable construction – The role of environmental assessment tools. School of the Built Environment, Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building, University of Technology, P.O. Box 123, Sydney, Broadway, NSW 2007, Australia. Fossati, M. Tese de Doutorado: Metodologia para Avaliação da Sustentabilidade de Projetos de Edifícios: O Caso de Escritórios em Florianópolis. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina – Programa de PósGraduação em Engenharia Civil. Florianópolis . SC, 2008. SB TOOL, Green Building Tool – SBTool. 2007.Canadá. Disponível em: http://www.iisbe.org/sbtool JSBC, Japan Sustainability Building Consortium – CASBEE –Comprehensive assessment system for building environmental efficiency. 2001. Japan. Disponível em: www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/index.htm Kaatz, E.; Root, D. S.; Bowen, P. A.; Hill, R. C. Advancing key outcomes of sustainability building assessment. Building Research and Information, v. 34, n. 4, p. 308-320, 2006. Kibert, C. J. 1994. Establishing Principles and a Model for Sustainable Construction, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Sustainable Construction of CIB TG 16, págs. 917. Center for Construction and Environment, University of Florida, Tampa, Florida. Kibert, C.J. 2008. Sustainable Construction – Green Building Design and Delivery. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2ª Edição, New Jersey. págs.432. ISBN: 978-0-047-11421-6 LEED, Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design – LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations v.3. U.S. GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL. 2009. USA. Disponível em http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=5546 Lee, W.L., Chau, C.K., Yik, F.W.H., Burnett, J., Tse, M.S.. On the study of the credit-weighting scale in a building environmental assessment scheme. Building and Environment 37, 1385–1396. 2002. LIDERA – Liderar pelo ambiente na procura da sustentabilidade, Apresentação Sumária do Sistema de Avaliação da Sustentabilidade da Construção, Versão para Ambientes Construídos (V2.00b). 2009. Lisboa. Disponível em: http://www.lidera.info/resources/LiderA_V2_00b.pdf Meadows, D.; Randers, J. 2004. – Limits to growth: The 30 – Year Update. Chelsea Green, EUA. págs. 398. ISBN: 1-931498-19-9 Meisel, A. 2010. LEED Material A Resource Guide to Green Building. Princeton Architectural,New York, EUA. págs.223. ISBN: 978-1-56898-885-6 NABERS: National Australian Buildings Environmental Rating System – NABERS for Home. 2010. Austrália. Disponível em: http://www.nabers.com.au/home.aspx, consultado a 02/11/2010 Pinheiro, M.D. 2006. Ambiente e Construção Sustentável. Instituto do Ambiente, Amadora. Disponível em: http://www.lidera.info/resources/ACS_Manuel_Pinheiro.pdf Seo, S., Tucker, S., Ambrose, M., Mitchell, P., Wang, C.H.,.Technical. Evaluation of Environmental. Assessment Rating Tools, Research and Development Corporation, Project No. PN05.1019. 2006. Sev, A. 2008. How can the Construction Industry Contribute to Sustainable Development? A Conceptual Framework, Sustainable Development, Vol.17, págs. 161-173 Silva, V. G. Tese de Doutorado: Avaliação da sustentabilidade de edifícios de escritórios brasileiros: diretrizes e base metodológica. Escola Politécnica da Universidade de São Paulo, Departamento de Engenharia de Construção Civil. São Paulo, pág. 210. 2003. Silva, V. G. 2007. Metodologias de avaliação de desempenho ambiental de edifícios: Estado atual e discussão metodológica. São Paulo. Disponível em: http://www.habitacaosustentavel.pcc.usp.br/pdf/D5_metodologias_de_avaliacao.pdf Spiegel, R.; Meadows, D. 1999. Green Building Materials, A Guide to Product Selection and Specification. John Wiley Sons, Icn, New York, EUA. ISBN: 0-471-29133-1 Teodoro, N.F.G; Henriques, P. M. G. Contribuição para a Sustentabilidade na Construção Civil: Reciclagem e Reutilização de Materiais. Sustentabilidade na Reabilitação Urbana: O Novo Paradigma do Mercado da Construção. Proceedings da Primeira Conferência Nacional iiSBE, págs. 127- 134. Portugal, Lisboa. Thormark, C. 2001. Conservation of energy and natural resources by recycling building waste, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 33, págs.113-130, Elsevier. U.S. Green Building Council. 2010. United States. Disponível em: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=222 Vieira, L.A; Barros Filho, M. N. M. 2009. A emergência do conceito de Arquitectura Sustentável e os métodos de avaliação do desempenho ambiental de edificações, vol.1, nº3. Humanae. Disponível em: http://www.esuda.com.br/revista_humanae.php World Business Council for Sustainable Development – The New Agenda For Business, Vision 2050. 2010. WBCSD, Switzerland. págs.3-4. ISBN: 978-3-940338-56-8