Search results

The present study aims to inform the requirements for developing a sustainable rating tool for small-scale infrastructure projects (SSIPs) through research findings.

A review-based comparative study of existing infrastructure sustainability (IS) rating tools for assessment of SSIPs is presented. Key stakeholder participants of the existing IS rating tools, are interviewed to identify existing barriers and requirements for sustainability rating. The study further presents possible rating tool options to optimise the sustainable performance evaluation of SSIPs.

Findings of this study indicated that prevalent IS rating tools are majorly applied to large-scale infrastructure projects and sustainability of SSIPs are seldom assessed. Based on a literature review and series of interviews, it was found that user friendliness, efficient structure, training and technical support, cost effectiveness and stakeholder recognition are the five key requirements of a sustainability rating tool for SSIPs. Additionally, six sustainability assessment options were proposed for SSIPs which range from pathways for existing tools through to new, customisable tools. Upon comparison, a new modified tool with verification process and revised tool with defined grouping of sustainable criteria was more effective for evaluation of SSIPs.

Use of case specific information for validation and framework development may lack generalisation. However, methodology can be used for future decision-making by making necessary adjustments to suit different local regional requirements.

Despite lack of generalisation, the findings can lead to future general studies on sustainability of SSIPs. Findings of the study provide foundation knowledge and awareness for sustainability evaluation of SSIPs.

The damage humans caused to the environment post the industrial revolution fostered developing sustainability-rating systems – a number of evaluation instruments that focus on various factors to evaluate buildings and small-scale urban developments. Nevertheless, no buildings are certified in Bahrain, the environmentally challenged country in the Arabian Gulf. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This study assesses 11 sustainability-rating systems: LEED, Green Globes, BREEAM, DGNB, SBTool, WELL, CASBEE, Green Star, HQE, GSAS and the Pearl Rating System (PRS). These were selected because of their international applicability, popularity and importance. The study adopts a system of criteria using a comparative review and cross-comparisons to draw conclusions on the compliance of the selected systems to the Bahraini context and assesses the need and importance of a customised sustainability-rating tool.

The study concluded that LEED is the most comprehensive, international and versatile sustainability-rating system. It is also the most popular. Nevertheless, the PRS is the most relevant to the Bahraini context and is the easiest to access.

This paper provides a deep understanding of sustainability-rating tools and introduces a methodology of comparison that can be used as a reference when choosing between tools.

Rating tools for the built environment were designed to engage consumers and enhance sustainability and resilience. However, the intended outcomes of these rating systems appear to have limited implementation in the residential new housing market in Australia. The purpose of this paper is to investigate consumers’ motivations and experiences who have purchased houses that are situated in a sustainability-based certified development and will have been required to comply with mandatory dwelling certification.

The paper explores the awareness and perception of sustainability ratings and whether the motivations for purchasing in the sustainably certified development have heightened their awareness of sustainability and the resilience of new housing. This has been investigated through a pilot study of consumers who have purchased land in a certified estate and built a new home, through an online survey.

The findings reveal that the rating systems are at present not having the desired influence as first thought; that is, to inform consumers of the sustainability of a dwelling or property and to instigate trust of the environmental credentials of the property.

This illuminating case study of participants who have purchased a sustainable rated development demonstrates that regardless of their concern for environmental issues, consumers have both low awareness and trust in the ratings. Despite this, consumers do seek value from these credentials to the overall property.

This study aims to illustrate the disconnect in engagement between developers, builders and new home buyers in relation to sustainability certification and implementation.

The dynamic support database (DSD) clinical support tool structures the risk of admission rating for individuals with intellectual disabilities. This study aims to investigate inter-rater reliability between multi-disciplinary health care professionals within the North West of England.

A small-scale quantitative study investigated reliability between raters on the DSD clinical support tool. A data set of 60 rating tools for 30 individuals was used. Descriptive statistics and Kappa coefficient explored agreement.

The DSD clinical support tool was found to have strong inter-rater reliability between individual items and the differences between individual scores were spread suggesting variance found could not be attributed to specific questions. Strong inter-rater reliability was found in the overall ratings.

Results suggest the DSD clinical support tool provides stratification for risk of admission ratings independent of who completes it. Future studies could investigate inter-rater reliability between organisations, i.e. health and social care professionals, and use a larger data sample to ensure generalisability. Replication of the study within child and adolescent services using the children’s DSD clinical support tool is also recommended.

The DSD clinical support tool has been implemented within the child and adult intellectual disability services across the North West. As more teams across England consider its implementation, the study provides reassurance that coding agreement is high, allowing for stratification for risk of admission independent of the rater.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a tool design for assembly and disassembly using rating factors. Design engineers need an automated tool to effectively analyze the ease of assembly and disassembly of the products or subassemblies. A good assembly design helps in easier disassembly and thus makes it easier to service, repair and maintain. Reuse and recycling aspects are given importance in the present days due to environmental regulations. Designers now use the life cycle design of the products. This creates an environment for the successful application of design for manufacturing, assembly and disassembly tools. This paper addresses some of those issues.

The analysis of a product design for ease of assembly/disassembly depends largely on whether the product is to be assembled/disassembled manually, with automation or a combination of these. For example, the criteria for ease of automatic feeding and orienting are much more stringent than those for manual handling of parts. The new design for assembly/disassembly (DFA/DFD) evaluation tool explained here enables the designer to review the existing design. This paper examines the existing techniques in the area of DFA/DFD and suggests a new methodology based on rating factors. Excel is used to create the interface for the user. Other popular methods were examined such as Boothroyd-Dewhurst, Lucas. Access, reuse, removal, tool, task and time method and assembly score method (Poli) were used as a base for this study.

The end result of this research is a new approach linked to assembly/disassembly rating score.

The new DFA/DFD evaluation tool enables the designer to review the existing DFA and DFD difficulties.

BE2ST-In-Highways is a framework for assessing the social impact of reusing materials in pavement building, using the Pavement Life-Cycle Assessment Tool for Environmental and Economic Impacts (PaLATE) and life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA). ENVISION is a two-stage assessment method with four levels of certification: bronze award, silver award, gold award, and platinum award. Stantec published the Green Guide for Roads in 2008 as a marketing tool to highlight its commitment to sustainable development (SD), and the certification policy was created using the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification policy. As part of their first-year requirements, Stantec and a team of Worcester Polytechnic Institute students created another ‘Green Guide for Roads’ in 2009 to integrate previously missing components of the certification guidelines. GreenPave was developed by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation as an SD certification framework based on the Greenroads and GreenLITES SD certification frameworks. Specifications are classified into three types: repair activities, new development projects, and credit for evident and clear criteria. The Greenroads SD certification process reintroduces SD ideas into highway building by awarding points to projects that effectively integrate SD objectives. I-LAST is a tool developed by the Illinois Department of Transportation, American Consulting Engineers Council (ACEC), and Illinois Road and Transportation Builders Association (IRTBA) to analyse SD principles in road infrastructure building. INVEST (Infrastructure Voluntary Assessment Sustainability Tool) is designed to be simple to use and includes four stages of a project. Scorecards for pavement, basic rural, basic urban, extended rural, extended urban, and custom are included. CEEQUAL (Sustainability Assessment and Awards for Civil Engineering, Infrastructure, Landscaping, and the Public Realm) was established to improve infrastructure sustainability and award projects to organizations that address environmental concerns in a productive and effective manner. It is managed by CEEQUAL Ltd. and is based on three SD principles: environment, economics, and labelling the social component of SD with access. Customized scorecards may be used when a project does not fit into one of the pre-defined scorecards. The framework was initially created for the United Kingdom (UK) but has now been revised to be worldwide relevant and includes two categories of projects: domestic (UK and Ireland) projects and foreign initiatives. It also offers six project awards. This chapter reviewed frameworks, models, and guidelines for sustainable infrastructure projects, emphasizing the Be²st-In-Highway rating system, ENVISION certification policies, green guide for road rating systems, greenlights certification system or policy, Greenpaves rating system, Greenroads rating system, I-LAST certification tools, invest rating tools, CEEQUAL certification system, and stars rating tools.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the clinical perspective of the practicality, utility and face-validity of the dynamic support database (DSD) Red, Amber, Green (RAG) rating support tool within adult learning disabilities services in a North West NHS Foundation Trust. The aim of the current project is to evaluate the practicality, utility and face-validity of the DSD RAG rating support tool, as reported by clinicians who have been employing it.

A mixed-methods design was utilised by asking clinicians to complete a questionnaire in relation to the DSD Support Tool. Questionnaires were distributed across three community learning disability teams within the North West. A total of 50 clinicians completed the questionnaire which included rated responses for quantitative analysis and free-text comments for qualitative analysis.

Positive ratings given by clinicians suggested good practicality, utility and face-validity in relation to the tool. Analysis of the free-text comments suggested that the tool supported clinical judgement in a standardised way and helped discussions with commissioners. Feedback also provided insights into how the DSD support tool could be improved.

Further investigation would be required to yield higher numbers of participation across NHS Trusts to add reliability to the present findings.

The DSD support tool has been used within the NHS Foundation Trust for the last 12 months however the practicality, utility and face-validity of the tool had not been explored from the clinician perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the IC Rating™ approach as a management consulting approach to measure intellectual capital and to report on the implementation and experience in one case study firm.

The paper describes the IC Rating™ model in the context of the exiting literature in the field of IC measurement and uses a case study to demonstrate its practical application.

Based on the presented case study as well as implementations in other organizations we find the IC Rating™ model a useful tool to facilitate the analysis and discussion about intellectual capital in organizations.

The article gives a complementary view to the most commonly used score card methods and guidelines for intangibles on how intangibles can be measured. IC Rating™ focuses on the comparability between companies and industries as well as a simplification of how to interpret intangible measures.

The original idea for the paper was to answer the question “Why do companies really need to measure and develop intangibles?”. The answer is “To improve company financial performance”. The IC Rating™ methodology is therefore based on the answers to two other questions: “Which parameters does an executive manager need to have insightful knowledge of, in order to make the right decisions for the future?” and “From where and whom should the executive manager receive this information?”.