Download files
Abstract
The main aim of this research is to develop a set of criteria to assess the performance of Building Sustainably Assessment Tools and use the BASIX developed by NSW Department of Planning as a case example to validate the performance criteria. This research also aims to indentify key issues underpinning BASIX’s development and performances and document the lessons learned. Mixed method including survey questionnaires and semi-structured interviews was used for data collection. Balanced Scorecard Approach is used to develop the assessment framework, which comprises four perspectives including sustainable, financial, stakeholders and system. This research was focused on the “system” aspect and indentified 16 performance criteria, including six for policy setting, namely “Standardisation”, “Integration”, “Workability”, “Transparency”, “Equity”, and “Risk conservative” six for technique and tool design, namely “Outcome focus”, “Sustainability thoughtfulness”, “Adaptability”, “Accuracy”, “Innovation”, “Usefulness of assessment results” and four for operation, namely “Effective communication”, “Adequate support and training”, “Effective monitoring” and “Collective learning”.
This research provided a review of BASIX development and performance. Following that, this research validated the 16 performance criteria from a system perspective by using BASIX team as samples. The survey results showed both the significance score and BASIX performance score of each performance criteria. Then this research used a scoring card to describe BASIX performance in its policy setting, technique and tool design, and operation, and also an overall performance from a system perspective. At the end of this research, BASIX performance and its strength and weakness in its policy setting, technique and tool design, and operation were presented using a balanced scorecard.
This research also identified several challenges during the development and implementation of BASIX which included managing stakeholders concerns and expectations, maintaining relevance and updating, insufficient resources and data Management for reporting. In responding to the challenges, a number of strategies have been found by this research. Finally, this research documented a number of lessons learned from BASIX in its policy setting, technical and tool’s design and operation: the policy should be gradually introduced, consistent with the existing system and remain relevance by ongoing consultation with stakeholders; the technical and tool’s design should rely on quantifiable performance based assessment, flexible for capturing industry practice in designs, easy to use, and undertake continual software development, system testing, and use standardised database; and the operation should include extensive support for users, particularly in the initial stage, have assessable and accountable performance monitoring and should negotiate a commitment for on-going resources.
The main findings of this research would contribute to the knowledge base of developing and implementing assessment tools for sustainability. However, this research is not without its limitations. As a case example, only the BASIX’s team opinion were obtained to validate the performance criteria, which could result a high possibility of social desirability bias that the participants might over report some of the performance criteria, while under report or miss discover others due to their internal positions and experiences. As a result, score results of BASIX can be only regarded as an internal team’s perception, which should be considered as a part of case example which was used to demonstrate the assessment process rather than a final assessment result. Therefore, in future studies, it is very critical to investigate the opinions of other stakeholders, especially the externals to obtain a set of more comprehensive and validated performance criteria.