Conclusions about the needs of development of performance levels and benchmarking criteria and weighting methods SuPerBuildings
This article deals with an output of the SuPerBuildings project. It is about the needs of development of performance levels and benchmarking criteria and weighting methods. The project aims at collecting information and analysing the situation with regard to availability and common understanding of performance levels for benchmarking and aggregation and weighting methods. It should help tool developers to determine reference values for the calibration of performance scales.
The collecting of information and analysis of the situation is in order to come to conclusions about the needs for (further) development and/or harmonization of sustainability indicators and assessment methods. The analysis is based on the study of eleven national building evaluation tools, i.e. BREEM, BNB/DGNB, PromisE, HQE, Valideo, CASBEE, LEED, SBTool CZ, Klima:aktiv Gebäudestandard, TQB and GPR Gebouw. All these tools have performance rating scale at the building and also at indicator level.
General structure - aggregation levels
All systems have several levels of aggregation. All of them have reference performance level – at building level – expressed as:
- A grade (A-B-C-D-E) or a number of stars
- A global mark (expressed in points) that is the sum of points for each indicator or each preoccupation
- A ratio
- An environmental profile
All systems are based on a four-level aggregation scheme:
- Global score (points, grade, stars, word, letter …)
Stakeholders and decision makers
Integration to CESBA
- Stage of building life cycle: whole building life cycle
Project and Funding programme
Name of project: SuPerBuildings
Funding programme: Seventh Framework Programme
Regions of implementation:
This document is valid for most parts or Europe; the development of performance levels and benchmarking criteria and weighting methods are tools for different European countries.
Name of contact person