Rethinking Performance Gaps: A Regenerative Sustainability Approach to Built Environment Performance Assessment

Sylvia Coleman, Marianne F. Touchie, John B. Robinson and Terri Peters
Additional contact information
Sylvia Coleman: Sustainable Built Environment Performance Assessment Network, The John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Design, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 2J5, Canada
Marianne F. Touchie: Civil & Mineral Engineering and Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A4, Canada
John B. Robinson: Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3K7, Canada
Terri Peters: Department of Architectural Science, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON M5S 1A4, Canada

Sustainability, 2018, vol. 10, issue 12, 1-22

Abstract: Globally, there are significant challenges to meeting built environment performance targets. The gaps found between the predicted performance of new or retrofit buildings and their actual performance impede an understanding of how to achieve these targets. This paper points to the importance of reliable and informative building performance assessments. We argue that if we are to make progress in achieving our climate goals, we need to reframe built environment performance with a shift to net positive goals, while recognising the equal importance of human and environmental outcomes. This paper presents a simple conceptual framework for built environment performance assessment and identifies three performance gaps: (i) Prediction Gap (e.g., modelled and measured energy, water consumption); (ii) Expectations Gap (e.g., occupant expectations in pre- and post-occupancy evaluations); and, (iii) Outcomes Gap (e.g., thermal comfort measurements and survey results). We question which of measured or experienced performance is the ‘true’ performance of the built environment. We further identify a “Prediction Paradox”, indicating that it may not be possible to achieve more accurate predictions of building performance at the early design stage. Instead, we propose that Performance Gaps be seen as creative resources, used to improve the resilience of design strategies through continuous monitoring.

Keywords: performance gap; gap analysis; regenerative buildings; post-occupancy evaluation (POE); pre-occupancy evaluation; qualitative assessment; quantitative assessment; occupant-centred approach; continuous monitoring; interactive adaptivity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4829/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4829/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4829-:d:191360

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().