Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13091/2594
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSipahioğlu, Işıl Ruhi-
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-15T17:35:52Z-
dc.date.available2022-08-15T17:35:52Z-
dc.date.issued2012-11-17-
dc.identifier.urihttps://iconarch.ktun.edu.tr/index.php/iconarch/article/view/84/60-
dc.identifier.urihttps://iconarch.ktun.edu.tr/index.php/iconarch/article/view/84-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13091/2594-
dc.description84en_US
dc.descriptioniconarch:S5en_US
dc.description.abstractThe methods to achieve sustainability in architecture have continuously entered the architectural scene with different conceptualizations of the tie between the elements of the 'tripolar mode l:' Society, environment, and economics. Although the roots of this model are first delineated in Brundtland report (1987) and concretized at the Rio Conference (1992), there is actually no consensus on how to conceptualize its framework. The model acts as a discourse, but it hasn't yet reached such a status to define a Khunian paradigm that might lead to a universal way of interpreting the elements of the model. Despite the lack of a generally accepted paradigm, the field is in the search of defining "best practices." Current researches on building environmental assessment tools best illustrate this trend. The paper aligns itself with researches that aim to take benefit from multiple perspectives of designing sustainably to enable the making of "green knowledge." In order to pave the way for this multiplicity, the paper discusses the influence of environmental assessment methods on design process, through three case study methods: BRE Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), la Demarche Haute Qualite Environnementale (HQE) and Deutschen Gesellschaft for Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB) certification system. While underlining the aspects of design process that is tom between objective and subjective decisions, the paper discusses the role of assessment methods in framing these decisions. The paper first delves into the epistemological and theoretical point of views that have prepared these methods. This examination bases on the design epistemology of Nigel Cross, that is, the study of "designerly ways of knowing." The paper, then criticizes these tools as to their positivist approach to design problems and their influence on limiting the design alternatives. This discussion is essential because due to the appeal of these assessment tools in marketing the projects, they would become the mainstream practice.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherKonya Technical University Faculty of Architecture and Designen_US
dc.relation.ispartofICONARCH International Congress of Architecture and Planning; 2012: ICONARCH I - ARCHITECTURE AND TECHNOLOGYen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectBuilding Environmental Assessment Toolen_US
dc.subjectSustainabilityen_US
dc.subjectBREEAMen_US
dc.subjectDGNB Certification Systemen_US
dc.subjectThe Procedure HQEen_US
dc.titleSustainability in Architecture and the Limitations of Environmental Assessment Toolsen_US
dc.typeConference Objecten_US
dc.identifier.volumeICONARCH Ien_US
dc.identifier.startpage283en_US
dc.identifier.endpage293en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryKonferans Öğesi - Uluslararası - Başka Kurum Yazarıen_US
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.openairetypeConference Object-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en-
Appears in Collections:ICONARCH - International Congress of Architecture and Planning
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
document - 2023-03-27T143104.320.pdf4.6 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

Page view(s)

68
checked on May 13, 2024

Download(s)

20
checked on May 13, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check





Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.