See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/253744025

Methods to Estimate Stakeholder Views of Sustainability for Construction

Projects

Article

CITATIONS READS

7 2,187

2 authors:

Urban Persson Stefan Olander

Lund University Lund University
9 PUBLICATIONS   41 CITATIONS    29 PUBLICATIONS   891 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Urban Tranquility View project

Decision Support System for Improved Accessibility in Multi-Family Housing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Urban Persson on 26 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 th
Plea2004 - The 21 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture. Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19 - 22
September 2004 Page 1 of 6

Methods to Estimate Stakeholder Views of

Sustainability for Construction Projects.

Urban Persson1 and Stefan Olander1

1
Division of Construction Management, Lund Institute Technology, Lund, Sweden

ABSTRACT: The new challenge for a construction project management is to meet the demands of
sustainable construction, defined by ecological, economical, social and cultural variables. During a facilities
lifecycle various activities involves a significant number of stakeholders. It could be those stakeholders who
directly are involved, e.g. architects, facility managers or users, and those who more or less are affected by
the project(s), e.g. the public. Each of these differs in their views of sustainability in general terms and in the
view of the actual project. Based on the sustainability subgroups; ecology, economy, social, and culture, a
profile of each stakeholder may be obtained. This can help the project management team to take a more, in
a sustainability view, correct course of action in their decision process. The purpose of this study is to
examine methods for estimating and evaluating views and opinions on sustainability from the various
stakeholders, and discuss the possible applications for these methods, and how they need to be adapted to
be suitable tools in construction project management.

Conference Topic: 2 Design strategies and tools

Keywords: Construction, Sustainable Construction, Stakeholder, Management

INTRODUCTION solutions and alternatives. In this process several

The construction sector has a huge impact on our
environment and of us as human beings. The sector
consumes a considerable part of our limited
resources as energy, raw material, water and land. A
construction project has to meet the demands of
minimising the impact on our environment and
optimising the impact on ourselves. These demands
are a way towards a sustainable development.
The new challenge for a construction project
management is to meet these demands of
sustainable development in the concept of
sustainable construction, defined as [1]:
“... the principles of sustainable development are
applied to the comprehensive construction cycle, from
the extraction and beneficiation of raw materials,
trough the planning, design and construction of
buildings and infrastructure, until their final
deconstruction and management of the resultant
waste. It is a holistic process aiming to restore and
maintain harmony between the natural and built
environments, while creating settlements that affirm
human dignity and encourage economic equity”.
According to definitions of sustainable development
and the Agenda 21, the development of sustainable
construction involves ecological, economical, social
and cultural variables.
Attention must be paid to the issue of sustainable
construction in all the decisions arising out of the
complex web of considerations associated with a
construction project. The obstacle is that sustainable
construction is cross-disciplinary, concerning a
multiple number of factors and stakeholders, which
has to be considered in order to achieve sustainable
evaluation tools are used. However, a single tool
does never consider the whole aspect of
sustainability, and is often used by different
stakeholders independent of each other.
The problem is that project frames often are set in
the early stages of the construction project, without
consideration to the issues of sustainable
construction. Thus, there is a need to systematically
combine different tools and methods of evaluating
sustainability, during the project life cycle.
2. THE STAKEHOLDER DIMENSION
Project stakeholders are defined as, individuals
and organisations who are actively involved in the
project, or whose interests may be affected by the
execution of the project or by a successful project [2].
The implication is that a stakeholder is any individual
or group with power to be a threat or a benefit [3]. The
stakeholders in a project can be divided into internal
and external stakeholders, The internal stakeholders
are those who are members of the project coalition or
who provide finance; the external stakeholders are
those others affected by the project in a significant
way [4].
An important part of the management of the
project systems environment is an organised process
to identify and manage the probable stakeholders in
that environment, and determine how they will react
to the project decisions [5].
The stakeholder dimension of sustainability,
mainly is to determining the social aspects of
sustainability, in combination with the economical,
ecological and cultural aspects. The social aspects of
 th
Plea2004 - The 21 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture. Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19 - 22
September 2004
the project must be fully considered and integrated
into decision making [6]. In introducing “AccountAbility
1000: a new social standard for building
sustainability” Becket and Jonker [7] states that
organisation information requirements should be
connected with the rapidly changing opinions, ideas
and needs of stakeholders, in the process of gaining
legitimacy for outcomes through their inclusion.
To effectively manage stakeholder interests it is
not enough to just identify their demands and needs.
Project management must also identify the relative
power different stakeholders have on the
implementation of the project. A method to do this is
stakeholder mapping [8], an approach, which is
adapted from the concept of environmental scanning
[9]. A tool in stakeholder mapping is the power /
interest matrix figure 1, which analyses the following
questions:
How interested is each stakeholder group to
impress its expectations on the projects decisions?
Do they mean to do so? Do they have the power to
do so?
high
Keep Key
Satisfied Players
Power
Minimal Keep
Effort Informed
low
low Level of interest high
Figure 1: Stakeholder mapping, the power / interest
matrix [8]
3. EVALUATION TOOLS
There are a lot of useful tools, commercial or
under development, for the construction sector
regarding evaluation of environmental, economic and
social assessment. Most of the tools are focused on
the environmental assessment and economic
evaluation. This section presents very brief some
examples of tools.
3.1 Environmental impact assessment tools
These kinds of tools are divided in LCA- (Life
cycle analysis) or criteria- based tools or a
combination of LCA and criteria-based tools.
Boonstra and Dyrstad Pettersen [10] are mentioning
for example a couple of the latter tools intended for
existing buildings from various countries as NABERS
(Australia), Miljöstatus (Sweden), Ecoprofile
(Norway), Green Globes (Canada), HQE (France)
and CASBEE (Japan).
Edwards and Bennett [11] presents some LCA-
based tools mainly for the design stage of a
construction project; Athena (Canada), Build-It
(Germany), Building Environmental Assessment Tool
2000 (Denmark), Escale (France), LCA House
(Finland), Eco-Quantum and Greencalc (The
Netherlands), Eco-Effect (Sweden) and Envest:
Environmental impact estimating software (UK).
Page 2 of 6
Other tools with a combination of LCA and criteria
according to SBIS [12] are the international GBTool,
LEED and SpiRiT from USA, BREEAM (UK), Equer
(France), OGIP (Switzerland) and Hong Kong
Building Environmental Assessment Method.
Most of these tools are developed for the local
market of each mentioned country [10] and apply
credit systems unique for each tool. There are some
concepts of assessment leading to certification.
A more general instrument of determining
environmental impact of materials, “ecological
rucksack”, is mentioned by Wallbaum and Buerkin
[13]. With this rucksack as input it is possible to
estimate resource productivity with the method of
MIPS, a monitoring tool for material flows. COMPASS
(companies´ and sectors´ path to sustainability) is a
tool to provide the management sufficient information
for integrated analysis and decisions [13]. Ecological
footprint [14] is another method of estimating
resource consumption. The footprint is expressed in
an amount of land and water required to produce the
resources and assimilate the waste a specific
population consumes and generates.
3.2 Economical tools
Evaluation of Life Cycle Costs (LCC) could be
used in the sense of whether higher initial costs is
justified by reductions in future costs (new building or
replacement of elements in existing buildings) and if a
proposed change is more cost-effective than the do-
nothing alternative [15] There are some commercial
LCC-tools (Life cycle cost) developed in USA [12]:
BLCC, QuickBLCC and LCCID. In Europe there are
examples of LCC-based tools as Cost Reference
Model (the Netherlands), LifeCycle (UK) and GaBi3
(Germany)
LCC has become a popular way of solving
environmental issues as for instance recycling and
demolition costs [16]. However, Gluch and Baumann
[16] argue that this may not be entirely appropriate
since the LCC tool was developed to rank investment
alternatives, and not to consider environmental
concerns. “It is important to emphasise that a
“traditional” LCC does not become an environmental
tool just because it contains the words life cycle” [16]
Cole and Sterner [17] argues that the limited use
of LCC is depending of the current design practice
and data accuracy. The major role of the LCC is to
provide the management of a better framework for
decisions and evaluate specific choices.
Another economical tool, often used to evaluate
different investment alternatives are Cost-Benefit
Analysis. Cost and benefits can be evaluated on a
variety of levels, Financial Appraisal (FA), Social
Financial Appraisal (SFA), Cost-Revenue Analysis
(CRA),Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), and Social Cost-
Benefit Analysis (SCBA) [18].
The most basic level is the purely financial
analysis, which basically assess the impacts of
different alternatives on the organisations own
financial cost and revenues.
When it comes to assess more than the purely
financial impacts, an CBA or SCBA is often used,
which tries to value the environmental, social and
cultural impacts of different alternatives in monetary
 th
Plea2004 - The 21 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture. Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19 - 22
September 2004
terms together with purely economical factors. These
tools are often used to assess public investments and
thus trying to evaluate the full impact of different
alternatives in monetary terms.
In practice it is hardly ever realistic to value all the
costs and benefits of options in monetary terms. Most
cost-benefit analyses will incorporate some additional
items which it is either not possible to value, or not
economic to do so. But where the most important
costs and benefits have been valued, the others can
be set alongside and included in the decision process
[19].
3.3 Social and cultural assessment
According to Barrow [20] there are techniques and
methods of social impact assessment as social
surveys, questionnaires, interviews, available statistic;
census data, nutritional status data and findings from
public hearings, operations research, social-cost-
benefit analysis, the Delphi technique, marketing and
consumer information, reports from social, health,
crime prevention and welfare sources and field
research by social scientists. Among these, the
method of census and demographic data tend to be
the easiest and causes few challenges and problems.
Environmental psychology issues of design and
construction [21] points out the essential in
participation of the involved stakeholders, especially
the users, in the process of designing a construction
project. One major aspect of the designing is terms of
privacy, both the need of interaction and to allow not
interacting. Optimisation also is needed for
homogeneity and heterogeneity in neighbourhoods
and separation of different land use: commercial and
residential areas. Designing should consider better
health, comfort, satisfaction, less crime and for peace.
3.4 Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA)
In decision concerning sustainability multiple
factors are involved. Multi-criteria analysis establishes
preferences between options by reference to an
explicit set of objectives that the decision making
body has identified, and for which it has established
measurable criteria to assess the extent to which the
objectives have been achieved [19,22]. The
evaluation does not give an optimal solution because
of the fact that one single alternative is rarely the best
solution when regarding all criteria. The MCA gives
the best compromised decision regarding all the
relevant criteria.
Multi-criteria analysis (MCA) is one of the
disciplines that have found a fertile ground in
environmental applications. Managing the
environment implies dealing with dynamic systems
that are only partly understood, with multiple interests
and multiple actors, with long-term implications that
Page 3 of 6
range from the local to the global scale [23]. In for
instance the Netherlands, MCA is sometimes used to
support the choice of alternatives in an EIA [24]
4. MODEL FOR EVALUATING SUSTAINABLE
CONSTRUCTION
As the major part of the final cost of a construction
project is set in the initial phase of the building
process, the major part of the environmental and
sustainability impact of the project is also fixed at the
same time [25,26]. As the building process continues,
the decisions made have less effect of the final cost
and the final sustainability impact of the project.
The urban model [27,28] was developed to control
the building process according to the principles for
sustainable construction for the urban areas of
industrial countries. Its purpose was to create a main
thread of sustainability priorities throughout the
building process. The model optimise the
sustainability objectives and targets of the property
owner’s organisation and of the specific conditions of
a actual construction project, related to the site and to
the purpose of the project. The urban model is a
important part of the complete management process
of sustainable construction.
The main structure of the urban model consists of
a verifiable sustainability programme, which is set as
early as possible in the project process. The model
includes measurable requirements, which are given
priority from a sustainability point of view. The model
is not supposed to be static with all its requirements
fixed at the programme stage. The function of the
model is to be dynamic and to allow requirements to
be changed as decisions and conditions changes
during the building process. After the end of a project,
the model supports the planning of maintenance and
could be used as a base of sustainability information
for users and tenants. The model is compatible with
most of the environmental management systems
supposed to be used of a property owner’s
organisation.
The Stakeholder-Urban Evaluation (STURE)
model presented in this paper is a proposal to
systemise the issues of sustainable construction. The
model is mainly based on the Urban model [27,28,29]
and empirical studies on stakeholder management
[30,31], supported with literature studies on tools for
sustainability and environmental issues. Figure 2.
The principle can be described by four steps;
stakeholder analysis, specific conditions for the actual
application, the general conditions of the organisation,
the sustainability programme and the application of
the programme.
 th
Plea2004 - The 21 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture. Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19 - 22
September 2004 Page 4 of 6

Stakeholder Analysis 8. Density bonus and/or accelerated building

permit processing for sustainable
construction.
Internal External
9 . Business rating indexes including
Stakeholder Stakeholder
Demands Influence sustainable building management criteria.
10. Trade of CO2 -certificates.
Specific Conditions General Conditions 4.2 General conditions
-Sustainability Review -Environmental Policy The general conditions of the organisation include
-Sicnificant Sustainable -Social Impacts the application-related conditions directly linked to the
Aspects organisation and its way of working. One main
-Economic conditions
-Documentation condition is the organisations environmental policy
-Legal conditions and environmental management system, including
relevant parts of environmental objectives and
Sustainability Programme targets. Another main condition is the social and
-Sustainable Objectives cultural impacts of the external stakeholders
influence. A third main condition is the economic
-Priority of Sustainable Objectives
conditions for the organisation (business related) and
-Sustainable Targets of the external stakeholders influence.
The general conditions of the organisation also
include for the application relevant general
Applications
descriptions, standard solutions, standard blueprints
etc. according to the activities of the organisation.
Plan of Choice of Inventory of
Sustainability Alternatives Facility 4.3 Specific conditions
and quality The specific conditions contain:
checks 1. A sustainability review
Evaluation Tools 2. An evaluation of significant sustainability
aspects
3. Documentation made during the process
Figure 2: The STURE model The sustainability review is a review of the
conditions specific of the site and surroundings of the
4.1 Stakeholder analysis
building described in ecological, economic, social and
The stakeholder analysis should consider the
cultural terms. Input to this review is the demands of
following aspects:
the internal stakeholders. Relevant tools from the
1. Identify all potential stakeholders, external
toolbox of Evaluation Tools are used as instrument for
as well as internal. the review.
2. Assess each stakeholders claim on the With the sustainability review as a base, an
project, are they proponents or opponents in evaluation of sustainability impacts is done and
relation to the goals of the project.
significant sustainability aspects are set. The
3. Assess each stakeholders interest and
evaluation considers only overall global and national
power to influence project decisions.
objectives plus the internal stakeholders’ demands.
The power/interest matrix (see figure 1) can be a
The process of documentations during the
useful tool to conduct the stakeholder analysis.
process changes the conditions for the application
Some powerful stakeholder can use or provide
and the conditions for sustainability targets on a
economic instruments to promote sustainable continuous basis.
construction, which can be divided in 10 categories
according to Drouet [32]. 4.4 Sustainability programme
These categories are:
The sustainability programme for the application is
1. Preferential credit conditions for sustainable
a result of an analysis and a prioritising of the specific
buildings.
conditions and of the general conditions. It consists of
2. Reimbursement, rebate and investments aid
three main parts:
offered by energy or water utilities, suppliers,
1. The sustainability objectives,
equipment etc. 2. Prioritising of the sustainability objectives
3 . Preferential insurance conditions for 3. The sustainability targets.
sustainable buildings, new insurance The sustainability objectives for the application
products.
depend on the environmental policy, social impacts
4. Setting up specialised funds for sustainable
and the economic conditions of the organisation and
construction.
the significant aspects of the sustainability review.
5. Fiscal bonus for the construction or
These objectives decide the direction of the
renovation of Greenbuildings.
application in a sustainability point of view; it
6. Heavier fiscal burden on non-sustainable formulates the main thread of the application as
construction. regards sustainability.
7. Grants, subsidies. Relevant tools from the toolbox of Evaluation
Tools are used as instruments to evaluate the input
 th
Plea2004 - The 21 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture. Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19 - 22
September 2004
aspects from specific conditions and general
conditions. The organisation management decides
and formulates the objectives according to the
evaluation.
Prioritising of the sustainability objectives is a
relative order of preference of sustainability objectives
because of preparation for forthcoming relative
conflicts and to meet other forthcoming demands of
the application. The prioritising depends on the
evaluation of the objectives and on the organisations
ability to deal with the objectives. It is a decision of
the organisation management.
The sustainability targets are sustainability
objectives divided in detailed and measurable units
from levels of system to levels of single components.
The methods and rules of verification of the
measurable sustainability targets are also
established.
It is possible to adjust the sustainability targets
during the process with confirmation in connection
with documentation.
4.5 Applications
Using the above mentioned model, it is possibly to
adapt the sustainability programme on several
applications connected to the construction sector.
One possible application is a plan of sustainability
and quality checks. It is drawn up by all players
involved in a project, based on the projects verifiable
sustainability targets and other quality requirements.
The aim is to verify all the sustainability targets
according to the methods mentioned in the
sustainability programme for the project. Divergence
and change of verification are a part of the projects
documentation. The verifications act as the basis of
the final documents for the project together with other
documentation related to the project. From the final
documents, sustainability information for the project is
able to find its way to the property owner’s
organisation for operation and maintenance, to users
and to tenants, according to the organisation’s
environmental management system. Furthermore this
sustainability information can be used as input to
sustainability indicators.
Another possibility is to use the model and the
evaluation tools for a sustainability decision of
alternative choices of methods, systems or
components. The sustainability programme is a
valuable input to MCA, EIA, LCC, CBA and other
evaluation tools in order to make choices between
different alternatives.
It is also possible to use the model and the
toolbox for a single sustainability facility inventory or a
more continuous sustainable real estate
management, indicated by Persson [28].
5 DISCUSSION
Sustainable construction is cross-disciplinary
concerning all the stakeholders involved in the
construction process. It is the stakeholders who
decide, directly or indirectly, the result of a certain
application. It is essentially for the management of an
application project to understand and deal with the
stakeholders different views and demands.
Page 5 of 6
Sustainable construction also deals with a multiple
of other input and output factors. To reach a way of
dealing with all these factors, it is necessary to
systematise and evaluate those concerning global,
regional, local and organisational constraints. But the
evaluation process involves both quantitative and
qualitative approaches. This cause a necessity to
formulate boundary criteria that are, more or less,
subjective to the organisation management. There
are also a huge amount of different factors, often full
of contradictions, to handle in the effort to create the
optimum regarding result, time, quality and final cost.
The model described in this paper systematises
the input of sustainability factors, depended on the
stakeholders views and demands and on the specific
constraints of the site or facility. Together with the
organisations standards, evaluation and formulation
of the sustainability objectives for the actual
application.
The objectives are set in priority and then divided
in measurable and verifiable targets. The model
forces the organisation to choose the most relevant
course of action to reach sustainability, with regard to
the actual application and to the ability of the
organisation itself. Furthermore, the model also meets
the demand for continual improvement in the
organisations´ environmental management system. It
is also possible to formulate sustainable indicators at
different levels and for different stakeholders. The
indicators could be relative the organisation and/or
connected with local, regional, national and global
objectives
There are a lot of evaluation tools on the market
or on the way to the market and most of them are
adapted to the special conditions of the national
markets. Most of the tools are concerning
environmental and economic issues. There is a lack
of good and useful tools for social and cultural issues
concerning sustainable construction, especially the
stakeholders influences and demands.
Further research of methods that combines the
quantitative factors of economy, ecology with the
more qualitative social and cultural factors are
needed to sufficiently deal with issues of sustainable
construction. Case studies can be conducted to
evaluate various methods and their applications. This
approach could eventually lead to proposals of
different sustainability indicators concerning
sustainable construction.
REFERENCES
[1] CSIR, UNEP-IETC, CIB, CIDB, Agenda 21 for
Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries, a
discussion document, WSSD edition, CSIR Building
and Construction Technology, Pretoria, South Africa,
Boutek report No Bou/E0204, (2002), 6.
[2] PMI Standards Committee, A Guide to the
Project Management Body of Knowledge, Project
Management Institute (PMI), USA, 2000.
[3] K. Gibson, The Moral Basis of Stakeholder
Theory, Journal of Business Ethics, 26, (2000), 245-
257.
[4] G. Winch and S. Bonke, Project Stakeholder
Mapping: Analysing the Interests of Project
 th
Plea2004 - The 21 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture. Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19 - 22
September 2004
Stakeholders, Chapter 23 in The Frontiers of Project
Management Research, Project Management
Institute (PMI), 2002.
[5] D. I. Cleland, Project Management – Strategic
Design and Implementation, third edition, McGraw-
Hill, 1999.
[6] P. Mahi, Developing environmentally
acceptable desalination projects, Desalination 138
(2001), 167-172.
[7] R. Beckett and J. Jonker, AccounAbility 1000:
a new social standard for building sustainability,
Managerial Auditing Journal 17/1/2 (2002), 36-42.
[8] G. Johnson and K. Scholes, Exploring
Corporate Strategy, Prentice Hall Europe, 1999.
[9] A. Mendelow, Environmental Scanning: The
Impact of Stakeholder Concept, Proceedings of the
Second International Conference on Information
Systems, December 1981, Cambridge, Mass, 1981.
[10] C. Boonstra and T. Dyrstad Pettersen. Tools
for environmental assessment of existing buildings,
Industry and Environment, UNEP, Paris, Volume 26,
No 2-3, (2003), 80-83.
[11] S. Edwards and P. Bennett, Construction
products and life-cycle thinking, Industry and
Environment, UNEP, Paris, Volume 26, No 2-3,
(2003), 57-61.
[12] SBIS, The Sustainable Building Information
System, http://www.sbis.info.
[13] H. Wallbaum and C. Buerkin. Concepts and
instruments for a sustainable construction sector,
Industry and Environment, UNEP, Paris, Volume 26,
No 2-3, (2003), 53-57.
[14] W. E. Rees, The built environment and the
ecosphere: a global perspective, Building Research &
Information, Vol, 27, no. 4/5, (1999), 206-220.
[15] M. Clift. Life-cycle costing in the construction
sector, Industry and Environment, UNEP, Paris,
Volume 26, No 2-3, (2003), 37-41.
[16] P. Gluch and H. Baumann, The life cycle
costing (LCC) approach: a conceptual discussion of
its usefulness for environmental decision-making,
Building and Environment 39, (2004), 571-580.
[17] R. J. Cole and E. Sterner, Reconciling theory
and practice of life-cycle costing, Building Research &
Information, Vol, 28, no. 5/6, (2000), 368-375.
[18] N. Lichfield, Community Impact Evaluation,
UCL Press, London, 1996.
[19] J. Dodgson et.al, DTRL multi-criteria analysis
manual, http://www.nera.com/eLibrary, NERA, 2001
[20] C. J. Barrow, Environmental and social impact
assessment, an introduction, London, UK : Arnold
(1997), 235-237.
[21] T. Cassidy. Environmental Psychology,
Behaviour and experience in context, Contemporary
Psychology Series, Hove, UK: Psychology Press Ltd,
(1997), 202.
[22] J. C. Pomerol and S. Barba-Romero,
Multicriterion Decision in Management, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 2000.
[23] E. Beinat, Multi-Criteria Analysis for
Environmental Management, Journal of Multi-Criteria
Decision Analysis 10 (2001), 51.
View publication stats
Page 6 of 6
[24] R. Janssen, On the Use of Multi-Criteria
Analysis in Environmental Impact Assessment in the
Netherlands, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision
Analysis 10 (2001), 101-109.
[25] W. G. Reed and E. B. Gordon, Integrated
design and building process: what research and
methodologies are needed? Building Research &
Information, Vol, 28, no. 5/6, (2000), 325-337.
[26] N. Kohler and S. Moffatt, Life cycle analysis of
the built environment, Industry and Environment,
UNEP, Paris, Volume 26, No 2-3, (2003), 17-21.
[27] U. Persson, Att styra ett hållbart byggande –
En definition av och en styrmodell för ett hållbart
byggande (Swedish Only) . Department of
Construction Management, Lund Institute of
Technology, Lund. Report TVBP-01/1011, 2001.
[28] U. Persson, Managing sustainable
construction- a steering model for the building
process. Proceedings, Sustainable Building 2002
International Conference, Oslo, Norway, CD-ROM,
2002.
[29] U. Persson, Managing sustainable real estate
development - a case of an SME real estate
company. Proceedings, Construction Economics and
Organization, 3 rd Nordic Conference, Lund, Division
of Construction Management, Lund Institute of
Technology, Lund University, 2003.
[30] S. Olander, Consensual Approaches to Siting
th
Controversy, Proceedings from the 10 International
Symposium on The Organization and Management of
Construction, University of Cincinnati, CIB, CRC
Press, (2003), 909-920.
[31] S. Olander, External Stakeholder Management
in the Construction Process, Division of Construction
Management, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund,
2003.
[32] D. Drouet, Economic instruments for
sustainable construction. A survey for the Paris
Regional Agency for Environment and New Energies.
English summary (ARENE Ile-de-France), Recherche
Development International, Paris, France, 2003.