Designing Buildings - User contributions [en]

BRE Trust Review 2014

2015-07-13T08:27:53Z

BRE Group: Created page with " '''''A report detailing some of the UK’s latest built environment research, ranging from the effects of lighting on human health to reducing waste in infrastructure projects,..."

'''''A report detailing some of the UK’s latest built environment research, ranging from the effects of lighting on human health to reducing waste in infrastructure projects, is now freely available.''''' 

The latest annual ''BRE Trust Review'' summarises recently completed projects funded through the BRE Trust’s research programme in the areas of sustainability, fire, energy, health and materials. In addition, a wide range of recent publications presenting some of the latest research, knowledge and guidance on these issues is summarised.

The Review also reports on developments in the Trust’s two themed research programmes on future cities and building resilience. Launched in April 2012 with over 70 public and private partners, the collective value of projects in the BRE Trust Future Cities research programme is more than £30m. The research involves 16 universities and 14 cities in the UK, the European Union and Brazil.

The Resilience of the Built Environment programme began work more recently in April 2015. “Resilience of the built environment has been identified as one of the main priorities of governments around the world,” says BRE Group Research Director, Dr Deborah Pullen. “They are responding to the increasing risks presented by extreme weather, natural and man-made disasters, terrorism and cyber-crime, a burgeoning global population and increased urbanisation.”

The Trust will provide £1m of funding for the two-year programme of resilience research, to underpin an effective partnership linking BRE, government, academia and industry. Plans to attract other significant funding will create one of the largest single initiatives for improving the resilience of the UK’s built environment.

Finally, the Review includes an update on the built environment research and education activities at the five BRE Trust supported University Centres of Excellence. There have been a total 170 PhD studentships, 100 staff and a portfolio of more than £60m of research completed or underway since the launch of the Centres of Excellence in 2006. They are situated at four UK universities in Bath, Cardiff, Edinburgh and Strathclyde, and one in Brasilia.

The ''BRE Trust Review 2014'' can be downloaded [http://www.bre.co.uk/filelibrary/BRE%20Trust%20docs/BRE_Trust_Annual_Review2014.pdf here].

[[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]

BIM - it's about the Planet - Part 1

2015-05-15T10:26:10Z

BRE Group:

'''Author: Keith Snook (with funding from [http://www.bre.co.uk/bretrust/ BRE Trust])'''

This paper is based on historical activity and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that.

In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely avaialbe to enrich lives socially and in enterpise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology.

BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

= '''Introduction – setting the scene''' =

The majority of papers on BIM - Building Information Modelling - tend to jump straight-in from a contemporary construction industry focus and concentrate on the technology angle. We risk however losing the wider context, including forgetting for example that the construction industry exists primarily to provide a built environment to facilitate other activities. In its potential for contributing to whole life data, BIM can help remind us of this. The construction industry in the UK has been the subject of many major reports in the last 100 years and we can also forget that these for the most part have each been a reaction to dissatisfaction of either specific aspects or generally a perceived poor performance. In order to put the application of the technology involved in BIM into a context this paper reviews ways in which the industry operates to deliver its products, picking up on themes from some of the many reviews, and links this to both the development of the environmental agenda and the emergence of the era of ubiquitous data [1].

= '''The environment''' =

There is no definitive date for the start of mass awareness of the environmental agenda; for some it is the early 1960s with pioneering publications, such as ‘Silent Spring’ by Rachel Carson in 1962 and early research findings starting to demonstrate trends, for others with the creation of early ‘action funds’ such as the Environmental Defence Fund in 1967 where a steep decline in the numbers of Osprey (Sea Eagle) caused alarm. For the mass photo-news and television oriented world a photograph taken on 24 December 1968 by Bill Anders an astronaut on the Apollo 8 space mission, might well serve the purpose. 

[[File:Fig 1 Earthrise.jpg|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 1 “Earthrise” (Image available freely from NASA)

With the barren lunar landscape in its foreground it symbolised the frailty of blue planet Earth and stimulated debate, action and awareness making it politically impossible for governments to continue to side-step the concerns previously expressed by engaged scientists and minority pressure groups. The path to where we are now has not been straight forward and agreement, particularly on action, seems to be harder to achieve notwithstanding increasing scientific consensus on imminent, predictable and irreversible effects of our influence. Of course even without the space mission(s) and the photograph we may well have arrived at the same place in our collective thinking but it provides a useful and emotive icon for the “start” particularly for those of us who remember its first publication.

So what has the environmental movement to do with BIM? Concepts initially restricted to environmental conservation have long since been supplanted by more holistic understanding of sustainable development [2] with the term “environment” being expanded to cover all that surrounds us. More often than not the term “sustainability” is left to stand on its own as the descriptor of an ambition or target. To be more than just subjective ideals, aspects of this or any other definition have to be measurable and to do that requires data. For example a popular expression is to aspire to ‘zero carbon’. The science on how to measure let alone achieve this is complex, opaque and imprecise but at least it is a concept involving a quasi-numerical value to aim at.

In the UK, the government hypothesis about BIM is direct on this. It refers specifically to carbon performance, is inclusive of economic value and is simply stated:

''“Government as a client can derive significant improvements in cost, value and carbon performance through the use of open sharable asset information” [3] ''

BIM is seen as a way of facilitating this as asset information is derived from data and some of that data will increasingly come from BIM, more will come from related data sets such as AIM (Asset Information Models) and others so far not ascribed an acronym but which will go on to be a part of ‘Big Data’ [4].

= '''What is data? ''' =

As we shall see in the context of BIM and the implementation of the current UK government construction policies leading the way for the rest of the market, particular data can be quite specifically described and identified and indeed this is what most of the activity and effort has been about; but more generally what is it and how does BIM data fit into the wider ‘open data’ initiatives?

Data is a plural of datum which means fact. It is generally represented by digits and symbols and theoretically if kept to this simplicity it is universally interpretable. The term is also used to represent values in a qualified form such that increasing the level of qualification decreases the universality of interpretation. So in this common use of the term it enters a grey zone between its purest form and information; this grey zone becomes an important issue in compatibility of systems that operate with the data. Information is knowledge that makes sense and produces meaningful results from data.

= '''Ubiquitous data''' =

That UK government statement does not say ‘BIM’ directly and that is where the notion of ubiquitous data enters the argument: Data is now everywhere and we do not know (yet) how best to use most of it creatively. Ubiquitous data includes social, mobile, big data, analytics, cloud, software as a service, process, and more recently, the [http://successfulworkplace.com/2012/11/05/microsoft-missed-out-on-the-internet-of-things-are-you-ready/ Internet of Things]. In forty years we’ve moved from an analogue society of paper and fixed telephone to a place where we are rapidly representing, our entire world as a digital landscape. Indeed the Earthrise photograph, or at least how it got to be taken, can be emblematic of this aspect too. The equivalent to the rooms of computing power at the time of that mission can now be installed in one device along with equivalent in digital storage of the paper drawings and specifications that would have been produced to create the Saturn launch vehicle used in the mission. Even more contemporarily it could be held in ‘the cloud’ and rapidly accessed on a smart-phone. 

[[File:Fig 2 Digital infrastructures illustration of Facebook activity in 2010.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 2 Digital infrastructures – illustration of Facebook activity in 2010 (published as creative commons by Mark Zuckerberg; founder and CEO of Facebook)

Digital infrastructures have to support our ideas and interactions and be expansive so that through them we can make sense of everything physical, such as location, direction, acceleration, presence, contact, pressure, proximity, texture, temperature, gestures, odour, sound and nothing (absence of anything presently measurable). Sensors, applications, logs, and human interactions feed the process which in turn enables automation and human decision making. Analysis cycle times reduce and are more precise and so better inform decisions, help eliminate waste and error and enable enhanced interaction in a measured physical world. This is all with us now in popular applications that we have already begun to take for granted such as (often free) route planning and recording apps for our Smart Phones that relate personal data (age, weight, heart rate etc) to GPS data for example and produce information such a power output, calories burned and much more. Similar may not be overtly happening in construction but the fuel for this technology is data and BIM is data. Data about our built environment and whilst its present use, primarily in the service of construction design and process might hardly dent the above aspirations or comparisons, its adoption into full life cycles will make it become ever more significant and part of the ‘Big Data’ jigsaw puzzle.

= '''Open Data''' =

The word ‘open’ indicates a significant move encouraging openness for the greater good in contrast to existing norms that emphasise ownership and advantage. Clearly commercial advantage and intellectual right continues to be important and respected but the movement is about freeing up all that does not genuinely need such protection. In the UK the Cabinet Office published the Open Data Strategy in June 2012 and hot on its heels the Open Data Institute (ODI) was founded in by Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Professor Nigel Shadbolt with £10m start-up funding (2012 – 2017) from the Technology Strategy Board. It is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, company limited by guarantee with the aim of catalysing the evolution of open data culture to create economic, environmental, and social value. It helps unlock supply, generates demand, creates and disseminates knowledge to address local and global issues through collaboration, incubation, nurturing and mentoring new ideas, and promoting innovation.

Internationally the G8 Nations Open Data Strategy and Charter [5] (2013) sets out a set of principles that will be the foundation for access to, and the release and re-use of, data made available by G8 governments. They are: 
*Open Data by Default 
*Quality and Quantity
*Useable by All 
*Releasing Data for Improved Governance
*Releasing Data for Innovation 

= '''IT in construction''' =

It is often said that the construction industry is behind other industries in its use of IT and at face value this is probably true though such statements are often supported by uncomfortable comparisons and lack of understanding of some of the issues. The complexity and transient nature of the relationships involved in the construction of the built environment is generally held as a reason (or excuse depending on viewpoint) for this backwardness. The industry has remained disjointed in its business structures and adversarial [6] in the legal frameworks that relate the parts to the whole. In this context it is unsurprising that the various fragmented parts of the total process have apparently been reluctant to invest [7] in IT solutions that themselves have been for the most part aimed at providing particular business-discrete or process-discrete applications.

For example even with BIM and its implication of collaboration the term “lonely BIM”, used to describe one discipline working in isolation with the technology, is not generally used as one might think in a pejorative way but used more to suggest that the protagonist is heroically doing the best they can under the circumstances. However logical there has been very little imperative or obvious reward for anyone to beneficially own the unification of the discrete parts. Where it is addressed the business model is typically to cover the costs from deflecting the process risks and the methodology has been invariably through exercising quite punitive contractual relationships rather than creative management processes. Similarly and confronted with such a marketplace there have been few incentives for the IT industry to present solutions or for any individual parts of the construction industry to commission holistic solutions. Any efforts, and there have been some, have largely been left to small bands of enthusiasts, sometimes ‘borrowing’ time from understanding and sympathetic employers and a few academics. The passion behind essentially pro-bono efforts and the preciousness of academia can sometimes prove as divisive as the commercial pressures that their efforts set out to question. 

Many official reports on the industry identified the structural weaknesses as contributory to habitual ingrained and almost anticipated poor performance. Evidence for this occurred in the application of first construction industry Key Performances Indicators (KPIs) in the early 2000s. There was some pressure to have certain performance measures, particularly related to design issues, which could score more than 10/10 in order to highlight those cases where, for example, good design has genuinely created something that significantly exceeds demands and expectations. The mathematical logic of this approach was not unreasonably questioned but reluctantly there was agreement to include instead some additional questions in the data collection of the kind “did the performance exceed expectations”. This missed the point being pursued but was enlightening in another way. What subsequently happened was that this box was quite frequently selected but accompanying very ‘middling’ numerical scores indicating that expectations of the industry are institutionally low. 

What should be a turning point, albeit that there are still threats from ingrained cultures and custom is the confluence of: 
*IT in the form of BIM (and systems that surround it),
*IT in the rapid growth and use of digital media particularly in a social setting which is informing more formal processes and facilitating blisteringly rapid change,
*Emerging patronage for new processes in construction that challenge the status quo.

These now occupy the same space and the timetabled ramped approach to the technology aspects (see Fig 4) also helps provide a platform to address the industry cultural and custom issues by the provision of authoritative guidance. 

= '''UK construction industry operation''' =

The Coordinated Project Information codes were issued in 1987 and included a promotional video the opening scene of which is an animation of soldiers at the battle-front in the Crimea (~1850s). They are sending a vitally important message via several messengers to battalion HQ: ''“Send reinforcements – we are going to advance”''. Through various stages of distortion and mishearing that message arrives at HQ as ''“Send three and four pence – we are going to a dance”''.

[[File:Fig 3 the early CPI and coordinated documents.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 3 the early CPI (large logo) and coordinated documents (small logo)

This simple, humorous, often quoted and no doubt apocryphal scene captures one of the most significant issues that construction has failed to convincingly address. As an industry it has risen to all kinds of technical challenges, produced the most spectacular feats of engineering and breathtaking architecture and design; but it has failed to get its communications working effectively. There have been many efforts to both identify the difficulties and address them with perfectly reasonable, logical and sometimes pragmatic guidance. 

= '''Industry reviews - Lutyens to Egan – a selection''' =
*Not technically a review but a good line-in-the-sand starting point; renowned and respected architect Edwin Lutyens (1869 – 1944) in a frustrated response to a richly artistic but information poor trend in architectural drawings of the time said ''“ a working drawing is a letter to builder telling precisely what to build not a picture to charm….”''
*''“''The Bossom Report” – formally titled:'' Reaching for the Skies ''1934 identified fragmentation, inefficiency and adversarialism as the critical problems
*“The Simon Report” – formally titled:'' The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1944 in addressing the plans for post war rebuilding clearly equated lowest tender methods with lower standards and identified insufficient pre contract preparation and problems of indefinite and inequitable sub contracts.
*“The Banwell Report” – (also) formally titled: ''The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1964 recommended what we would now refer to as more collaborative processes using less adversarial relationships.
*“The Tavistock Report” - formally titled: ''Interdependence and Uncertainty: A study of the building industry,'' 1966 noted the crippling effect of fragmentation (and actually rather summed it all up in its imaginative title).
*“The PIG Report” - formally titled: ''Project Information - its content and arrangement A report and proposals on the way forward'' 1978 By the Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination. This also called on research such as that reported in ''BRE Current Paper 18/73 “Working drawings in use” ''and ''BRE Current Paper 60/76 “Coordinating working drawings'' and went on to recommend (and fund) the creation of the CPI documents mentioned above and to set up the interdisciplinary body that maintains their contemporary versions and other publications and services to this day - CPIc[8] (fig 3) 
*Latham 1994 [9] and Egan 1998 [10] again recognised the issues and, among other observations, both authors effectively said to the industry “why have you not adopted these (CPI) protocols?”. On neither occasion did the industry provide a reasoned response to the question. 

These are a selection of the better known reports and, in the light of what has transpired, one might only say ‘influential’ with some qualification.

= '''“Avanti” and “Building Down Barriers”''' =

In a programme funded by the then Department of Trade and Industry (DTI 2002) the CPI protocols were used in a mandated way on a series of projects. Otherwise they were all ‘ordinary’ building projects with a spread of technologies across what we would now call level 0 and 1 with a hint of level 2 on some as defined in fig 4 – the Bew - Richards BIM maturity graph. The projects were all fairly conventional, and used normal professional appointments, contractual arrangements, insurances, penalties etc. The programme was called ''Avanti – ICT enabled collaborative working'', and the only difference compared to other projects of the time was that they were each facilitated by individual mentors who knew the ins and outs of the relevant protocols including some that were in draft at that time such as documentation that was to evolve into BS1192 – 2007. 

[[File:Fig 4 BIM Maturity copyright obtained Bew Richards.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 4 BIM Maturity Graph in an early published form – Copyright obtained Bew Richards

Avanti reported in 2007 and on average showed savings in line with those expected in the current BIM programme of around 20 – 25%. Individual savings recorded for particular activities were even more startling: 
*Early commitment offering up to 80% saving on implementation cost on medium size project
*50-85% saving on effort spent receiving information and formatting for reuse
*60-80% saving on effort spent finding information and documents
*75-80% saving in effort to achieve design co-ordination
*50% saving on time spent to assess tenders and award sub-contracts
*50% saving on effort in sub-contractor design approval

A further initiative with a promising title "Buidling down Barriers" [11] analysed the reasons for ‘initiative failures’ of the past and ironically also predicted its own failure in an early passage where it stated:

''“The reason why the numerous reports between 1929 and 1994 have failed to have any impact on the performance of the construction industry is because the industry continues to be blind to its failings. It is also unwilling to measure its performance, particularly the impact of fragmentation and adversarial attitudes.”'' 

''Building Down Barriers'' also had good patronage from the UK military as a very experienced client for a substantial built portfolio but even with its backing through demonstration projects and rather like Avanti, ''Building Down Barriers'' was seen by the rest of the industry primarily as a research experiment – exciting, fulfilling and a glimpse of a possible future for those involved but with the majority of them subsequently moving on to new projects procured and operated in a conventional way. Exposure to these projects slightly swelled the ranks of those individuals convinced by the methods and committed to improvements but they were still very much in the minority and mostly then with very little influence in the face of the complacency identified in that passage from the report. However with the emergence of the current government stimulated “BIM agenda” a gratifying number of those involved in or having knowledge of both ''Avanti'' and ''Building down Barriers'' and other research have emerged and, several years on, are operating in positions of influence. 

= '''Value and Quality''' =

 

'''Value = What you get''' / '''What you give''' 

albeit that he notes that subjective and personal assessments for measuring the quantities of “what you get” and “what you give” must be used. Clearly, a result greater than unity is a positive (good) value outcome and less than unity is negative (bad). 

Value can be broken down to various types as identified by Dr Sebastian Macmillan in ''The value handbook'' [12]''. Exchange value'' is easy to quantify monetarily for example (it is often referred to as ‘book value’ and will appear on asset registers) and there are systems such as BREEAM that address ''environmental value'' in quantifiable terms. ''Image value'' can generally be assessed in context by those to whom it is important and for some endeavours ''use value'' might conform to a fairly precise algorithm, eg factory efficiency, but ''social value'' and ''cultural value'' may be difficult to reduce to simple monetary terms. 

Quality is technically fairly easy to define (there is a British Standard / ISO definition) and measure but the difficulty comes more from misuse as the term is often used loosely for example to describe gratuitous opulence rather than effectiveness or fitness for purpose or even beauty. Government funded research at BRE contemporary with that for the CPI codes focused on a long term objective and observational study of the achievement of quality on UK construction sites and produced interesting results that did not support common perception. The emphasis on objective research is important in this. Research based on typical survey or structured interview techniques as would be more likely now would have probably produced different results for the same reasons as the failure to adopt better working practices noted in the ''Building Down Barriers''. The construction industry has not embraced attempts at self-contemplation or measurement and has taken precious little notice of any applied to it by third parties, including BRE even when it was a government funded research laboratory. Therefore the industry self-perception, which is what inquisitorial rather than observational techniques tend to expose, is likely to provide a biased picture. The BRE research [13] contradicted commonly cited industry rhetoric which often displayed almost feudal attitudes in placing responsibility for failures with trades people or other operatives as a default. The research, which was not distracted by industry opinions or prejudices, showed that management and professional failures to do with information are responsible for far more compromises of the quality of the product than those directly caused by site works or operatives. On the issue of skill for example it found that there was abundant skill in those properly trained for the job albeit at times there were simply not enough skilled people to match workloads. By far the single largest culprit for failures of quality however was ''missing or inadequate project information ''[14]''.'' Which again directs us to consider BIM and particularly the UK government led initiative which emanates from the Government Construction Strategy. 

= '''The technology''' =

What we now know as BIM may not go quite as far back as the Lutyens quote but certainly goes back to the 1960s – the era of “Banwell” and “Tavistock”. Put very simplistically, and perhaps even patronisingly, the development of computing has in part been a story of a universal solution with huge potential looking for problems to address. Applications in manufacturing are familiar and there were enlightened thinkers from both computing and construction who had realised that the built environment would also be a very likely place. Indeed not just the “built environment” but environment more generally as developments in mapping (Geographic Information Systems – GIS) have run in parallel with those for construction. The first mass impact of computing was to business generally where computers were enthusiastically introduced to automate tedious tasks. This put computers inside organisations and increased their familiarity. It was also the start of the idea of integrated business systems with forward thinkers envisaging a situation where data would only emerge for uses that require human intervention and not for it to re-emerge for such things as transfer between operations if no human intervention was necessary. This is an ideal we are still pursuing, its original conception having been severely hampered by the development of competing proprietary systems for the most part addressing solitary purposes and functions and parts of complex processes rather than the whole. This would also become an issue with CAD and BIM systems.

For construction, creating detailed technical drawings (as distinct from design drawings) was identified as one of those “tedious tasks” and application of computing to this became CAD in the form Computer Aided Drafting. The same acronym is used for Computer Aided Design with many confusingly using the two synonymously. As early as 1962 Douglas C. Englebart makes suggestions of the shift from just Drafting to Design in his paper ''Augmenting Human Intellect'' [15]. Perhaps being an engineer rather than an architect himself his cited ‘architectural design’ example, focuses on technical rather than aesthetic design aspects.

''“The architect next begins to enter a series of specifications and data – a six-inch slab floor, twelve-inch concrete walls eight feet high within the excavation, and so on. When he has finished, the revised scene appears on the screen. A structure is taking shape. He examines it, adjusts it. These lists grow into an ever more-detailed, interlinked structure, which represents the maturing thought behind the actual design.”'' 

It does however introduce concepts of what we now know as parametric object based design involving a relational database; or (now) BIM for short. 

In construction and with the move from research into viable commercial systems during the 1970s and 80s much of the development activity became directed towards further reducing the tedium and cost of drafting and, for the more forward thinking, creating parametrically accurate objects linked to other relevant data. Virtually all development however had the objective of producing reliable drawings, and schedules, to fit into the normal contractual, legal and business processes of construction whether in the UK, US or Europe (or elsewhere – Finland for example has always been at the forefront of the subject). With much of it having been based in research and at that time there being little imperative for considering open or interoperable systems, improvements continued in the computing aspects and software advanced (within the scope of also rapidly improving hardware) but the end game was still servicing the industry business norms and to a limited extent advancements in visualisations and graphical rendering. Whilst the earlier list of reports and the sometimes bleak messages within them about these norms is confined to the UK, most other regions had broadly similar issues with interdisciplinary relationships and there was little reference to using information technology to address these issues. Perhaps there should have been more in that the sponsoring body for the 1978 UK “PIG” report was the “Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination”, but the report focused on the observed problems, with frequent references to BRE research, and bizarrely bearing in mind the scope implied in its title, did not mention computer applications. 

Another aspect, particularly in respect of commercial development in the early years was the human/computer interface and there was a period when the software and processing power/potential was running well ahead of this aspect as in the laboratory interface issues are generally not such an imperative. A watershed occurred between 1980 and 1985 in the commercial application of interface systems, led by the mouse, that we are familiar with now. 

In the mid to late 1980s there was a discernible split in development effort. The first was towards efficiencies in the construction process which is where the first references to time being the 4th dimension in what was to become BIM were made. The other was continued development of design aspects and simulations. 

= '''Becoming virtual''' =

In 1982 in Budapest, Hungary, work started on what is generally reckoned to be the first BIM software. Current versions of this software are in use today, they are favoured by Mac users and used mainly on small to medium sized construction projects to which it is particularly well suited. Inspired to make something to cater for more complex projects the same group developed software which following purchase by a much larger software company in 2000 is now one of the most ubiquitous Architectural BIM authoring tools with versions for other disciplines also in the portfolio. 

Prior to this acquisition, which changed the company’s commercial landscape by adding a highly functional proprietary tool to their portfolio, the company had teamed up with the International Alliance for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability Interoperability] (IAI – later to become BuildingSmart [16]), to produce a particularly altruistic film called “The End of Babel” [17]. The film promotes open systems and particularly the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) [18] that AIA had just started to develop. It uses the famous story of the building of Babel as an analogy with the lack of system interoperability and, albeit an American production, was presented by a UK television household name of the day on technology, James Burke. From his script: 

''"The [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel Tower of Babel], one of the biggest construction projects undertaken. Designed to reach the heavens. But the engineers couldn't finish the job. Halfway through everybody working on the job was stricken with inability to understand what the other fellow was saying. They were all still talking......but they weren't communicating. That incident was supposed to have taken place in around 5,000 BC. And we've been trying to understand each other ever since''." 

That vision in the film remains an objective of the current BIM initiative in the UK and probably also elsewhere as whist it focuses on the technology and the ambition for IFCs, the underlying story is about total collaboration and cooperation in order to achieve the goal.

Another approach to design collaboration is software which is solely designed to coordinate across varying file formats and include other features such as data collection, construction simulation and clash detection.

Simulation programs, many aimed at environmental issues, have been developed that work with imported models and recently BIM authoring tools have provided inbuilt simulation capability also. More recently still the increase in hand held devices has been recognised and the niche of rapid conceptualisation using such devices is being addressed by software providers including those from outside the established construction software providers and including the power houses behind global data searching.

The last significant player (for now) in the technology support is collaboration software. The message is finally being accepted at the leading edge that the multitudes of designers, consultants, project managers, construction contractors and sub-contractors brought together in a temporary organisation for the term of a project need to be able to communicate in a controlled and reliable manner with much of that communication being at data level. Only then can they start to operate effectively and efficiently as a team. The leading providers of collaboration software have also recognised the basic project stages such as design and contract preparation, construction and contract completion and operate and maintain; and are engaged in making their tools applicable throughout it. Indeed in the UK the government is funding a master ‘digital Plan of Work’ in order that all sectors can adopt a common structure. The gulf between the information involved in the construction and operation of a facility has been identified for some time and much effort is now becoming concentrated on that.

= '''Creative tension''' =

Related to the introduction of the technology there is a tension within the education of creative designers such as architects. The argument suggests that creativity could suffer in the face of expediency and this is probably best explained by using a simple example. BIM platforms typically represent walls, for example, as objects with layers and these layers are defined in terms of the depth and height and are then extruded along the length of a line. The program then has the ability to calculate dimensional properties such as the volume of material contained within the wall assembly and to create wall sections and details easily. However by definition this type of workflow is based on the existing buildings, common industry standards and conventional technology and solutions and therefore a project which is produced in BIM authoring software which emphasises these methods is likely to reinforce existing paradigms rather than contribute to developing new ones that advance the art and science. This is, or certainly the fear of it is, further exacerbated by the proliferation of BIM Libraries which, rather like standard details in line-drawn form from previous generations, are viewed with some suspicion. 

These perceived limitations of parametric flexibility and geometry sculpting has led to the development of systems supporting non uniform rational basic splines (NURBS). These platforms have provided the power to iterate and transform for complex and provocative architectural forms and are favoured by those wishing to explore forms involving organic shapes and for projects such as those related to infrastructure where, for example, natural landform shapes inform or become a part of the design. NURBS is now increasingly incorporated into more generally available in software.

[[File:Fig 5 NURBS.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 5. NURBS surface defined by control points over a two-dimensional parameter field. (Creative commons: Wikimedia.org)

= '''BIM and the UK Government Construction Strategy [19]''' =

Whilst private sector client bodies, design consultants, construction contractors and others have variously seen advantages of BIM and implemented aspects of BIM on projects it is the Government Construction Strategy (2011) that is the authoritative origin for the government led initiative that is now the primary focus for the application of BIM in the UK. The key sentence within the strategy for this is: 

''“2.32 Government will require fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic) as a minimum by 2016''.” 

This and the detail surrounding it, not least a fully detailed “BIM strategy” [20], has taken much of the attention and an important feature is the inclusion of a premise that the government as a client for construction needs to improve and indeed become exemplary. For government this uniquely means committing to and publishing a rolling programme of procurement intentions. This is an important aspiration for an industry that is reluctant to make significant capital investment, is one of the most sensitive to economic cycles and is wary of an historic trend of being used as a fiscal regulator by successive governments. More generally and an aspect that has more potential to be replicated in the private sector is creating defined data expectations at predetermined points within individual projects (fig 6) 

[[File:Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points set against generic work stages (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

The provision of explicit individual project data provides for a greater accuracy in evaluating that work in terms of quality, time and cost. It is presumed, and at present can only be hoped, that this client facing subtlety of the whole initiative is not lost when translated for private procurement when the distinctions between capital and operational budgets or even simply short and longer term benefits generally are in apparent commercial conflict brought about by silo thinking. Government has also identified a number of projects on which to test the emerging procedures being developed to accommodate both new working practices and apply methods including BIM software. Fig 7 shows an example of a chart from one of these early projects illustrating the high level data requirements set against the project work stages (running along the top). The information or data sets that respond to the data requirements will then generate definite client actions and decisions that allow the project to progress without the lack of certainty typical in much construction procurement. 

[[File:Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements. (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

Describing the current incarnation of BIM in the UK invariably and logically starts with the “Bew/Richards maturity graph”. This has been used to guide and map the production of critical industry documentation on the subject as a part of a “roadmap” to the standards and other document development to support the implementation of BIM (fig 8). In 2014 the definitive items of such guidance for ‘level 2’ were determined. Each of these documents has further references to others necessary to complete the story. 

They are: 
*PAS,1192-2 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling [21] 
*PAS 1192-3, [http://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/Details/52072 Specification for information management for the operational phase of construction projects using building information modelling] 
*BS 1192-4, UK Implementation of COBie 
*CIC BIM protocol, 
*Government Soft Landings, 
*Classification - to be completed in 2015 
*Digital Plan of Works - to be completed in 2015 

[[File:Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph – a part of the UK roadmap for BIM. (The Roadmap from Govt. BIM Task force web site is a live document updated from time to time to reflect progress and necessary changes) 

With the clarification of this list it is possible to more positively define what ‘level 2’ BIM is and to create focused education and training to establish and test core competencies. Courses both in formative education and particularly in re-educating practitioners through CPD and other training is now taking shape. 

The most significant of the documents listed is PAS1192–2 which in large part is focused on the Information delivery cycle at fig 9. The information delivery cycle is explained in detail below and selected definitions from the Standard are also included to aid its understanding. It shows the cycle laid-out against a process plan. This plan will eventually be set out, when work is complete (mid 2015), to be the digital Plan of Work. 

An important point, probably the most important point about the development of the UK BIM maturity levels is that whilst the line between level 2 and level 3 can be, and is, described in technical terms and in terms of the information handling processes and protocols it is primarily determined by the ability to operate within normal contractual, legal and other broadly familiar arrangements up to the line. What this means is that no wholesale rewriting of construction contracts is necessary although it does encourage a change of approach and certain modification as provided for in the CIC BIM Protocol which also introduces a new task of information management which is covered in a referred document called the Outline Scope of Services for the Role of Information Management. The Protocol is a contractual document that when introduced takes precedence over existing agreements (so a fairly significant amendment to standard forms) and places an obligation on parties to provide distinct elements of their services at predetermined stages in a project. The application of the Protocol is covered in guidance also prepared by the CIC. This guidance also covers aspects of professional indemnity insurance - often cited as a stumbling block for collaborative methods. 

[[File:Fig 9 The information delivery cycle at the heart of BIM.png|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 9 The information delivery cycle that is at the heart of PAS 1192-2. (Copyright obtained from Mervyn Richards)

----

'''Notes for fig 9''' 

The information delivery cycle has two points of entry. For new build projects, at the “Need” box (top right in the fig), for projects that are part of a larger portfolio or estate, or for work on existing buildings and structures, it is at the right-hand arrow “Assessment” which draws on the information in the Asset Information Model (AIM). Here PAS1192-2, which deals with the Capital expenditure phase, references PAS1192-3, which deals with the Operational expenditure phase. These points of entry are also referenced in the Common Data Environment – CDE (central zone in the fig). The information delivery cycle (blue arrows) shows the generic process of identifying a project need, procuring and awarding a contract, mobilizing a supplier and generating production information and asset information relevant to the need. This cycle is followed for every aspect of a project, including the refinement of design information through the seven project stages shown (green). Work is on-going defining these as an accepted industry standard but well known systems such as the RIBA Plan of Work (2013) can be used.

The pale green wedge represents the CDE that collects information through the lifecycle for management, dissemination, exchange and retrieval processes.

Red circles indicate information exchanges between the project team and the employer in answer to the Plain Language questions defined in the employer’s information requirements (EIR). Information exchanges between project team members are indicated by small green circles. '''Selected definitions from PAS1192-2asset information model (AIM) ''' maintained information model used to manage, maintain and operate the asset.
*common data environment (CDE): single source of information for any given project, used to collect, manage and disseminate all relevant approved project documents for multi-disciplinary teams in a managed process
*employer’s information requirements (EIR): pre-tender document setting out the information to be delivered, and the standards and processes to be adopted by the supplier as part of the project delivery process
*information exchange: structured collection of information at one of a number of pre-defined stages of a project with defined format and fidelity
*master information delivery plan (MIDP): primary plan for when project information is to be prepared, by whom and using what protocols and procedures, incorporating all relevant task information delivery plans
*project implementation plan (PIP): statement relating to the suppliers’ IT and human resources capability to deliver the EIR
*project information model (PIM): information model developed during the design and construction phase of a project

= '''Keeping up to date''' =

Any published paper on the current development of BIM and particularly developments within the UK government strategy under the leadership of the BIM Task Group will inevitably quickly become out of date with the latest information published on the task group website [http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/ http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/] . Included among a wealth of useful information and resources on the site are reports from the case study projects under the title ‘Lessons Learned’ and these are regularly updated.

= '''Bringing it all together''' =

Harnessing IT and computing power in the name of the built environment will of course not stop here, indeed the developments will continue at a rapid rate but there is clearly a view that in terms of BIM and those issues that surround it, a watershed has been reached. The completeness, availability, accessibility and robustness of both authoritative guidance, much in the form of Standards, and commercially available tools such as, but not restricted to, BIM authoring software, is adequate to dispel objections from the industry to adopt more reliable ways of working, particularly when a strong client effectively mandates that way. This is effectively what the UK government announced in 2011 to take effect by 2016 and whilst the UK is not alone in its ambitions it is the most emphatic and certainly has made the most powerfully managed and supported statement of this kind. The general view is that because of this approach the UK has taken the international lead “in BIM” with UK originated Standards forming the basis of International Standards to be published by ISO (International Standards Organisation). This also marks the starting point for most papers about BIM.

They also very often seek a definition for what ‘BIM’ is, something that this paper has steered clear of, preferring to chart the rocky path to where we are now and leave the reader to contemplate the need for a definition. Thankfully it is generally now accepted that sales of software with BIM in or implied in its title is not a valid indication and neither is some kind of measure of 3D graphical representations, renderings or animations; much as they have their place. Almost all of the leaders in the field in the UK and many elsewhere have generally given up in trying to define BIM briefly and there is now a broad understanding that the shorthand use of the term describes something that it is about much more than software and 3D imagery. They see that it is primarily about dealing with information in all its forms accepting that much of this is exchanged as data that only needs to emerge from the various systems (inevitably utilising up to the minute IT) at operational points requiring human intervention. A number of single paragraph definitions do exist, and at the end of this paper, that offered in 2010 by CPIc is included as it is derived from a short study of a collection of other definitions and does not contradict the above understanding. However and as we have seen, in the UK various levels have been created and described in terms of evolving ‘maturity’ (fig 8) and the official ‘definition of the 2016 target “level 2” is set by a number of Standards and protocols listed previously. Einstein said that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” In respect of a definition of ‘BIM’ this seems to be a wise statement. 

= '''Summary''' =

So what we have is:
*A realisation and acceptance that the way we are using the planet is not sustainable and that buildings and infrastructure must play their part in preserving valuable and exhaustible resources.
*A latent realisation that relatively new found powers of mass data collection, exchange and analysis can help determine where activity and measures might be best focused in order to most effectively address sustainability issues.
*An industry, and that is the extended industry including suppliers, manufacturers and those responsible for managing facilities, that has historically failed to perform optimally due primarily to its fragmentation and management issues and within those particularly issues of information management. Information is made up of data.
*A market that has accepted the poor performance of the industry as the norm and has exacerbated and promoted that poor performance through its procurement and financing processes.
*Products from the industry that are sometimes stunning in their contribution to the landscape and exemplary in terms of design and function but which, across the entire range, are habitually an opaque mystery to those that use operate and maintain them.
*A catalogue of proposals from authoritative bodies (many external to the industry) that are thematically similar enough as to not be competing, contradictory or confusing that thoroughly address many of the issues but which have been largely ignored by both the industry and the market as they question customs, norms and historic vested interests.
*A set of technologies – broadly labelled ‘BIM’ – that both demand the application of some of the previously ignored proposals to operate optimally and helpfully make it easier for that to occur.
*Driven by social use as much as scientific or business use, a blisteringly rapid movement towards a world of pervasive data. Indeed the speed and intensity of this is such that at times distinctions between social, scientific and business become blurred.
*In the UK particularly but with similar elsewhere also; a client body large enough to demand a phase-change in procurement parameters and committed enough to invest in formal guidance, systems and protocols to a published timetable.
*Encouragement that, led by early stages of this phase-change, the UK is reckoned to have taken the lead in meaningful BIM implementation [22].

= '''The future - “Level 3?”''' =

Relating back to the levels of the maturity diagram (fig 8), what about level 3?

A part of the success of the UK initiative is concentrating minds on the presently doable, and more importantly useful, in order to make progress in manageable step changes. Because of this it has been difficult to get any firm information on level 3 and what it will look like. However, on 26 February 2015 the launch of Digital Built Britain, the UK Level 3 Building Information Modelling program was announced by Rt Hon Dr Vince Cable. The press release said: “The work will build a digital economy for the construction industry in support of dramatically improving delivery, operations and services provided to citizens. The programme will build on the standards and savings delivered by the BIM level 2 initiative which has been central to the £840M savings achieved on central public spend in 2013/14.” A new website has been established at [http://digital-built-britain.com/ http://digital-built-britain.com/].

Many in the industry had filled-in the level 3 void using their own imaginations as to what it might be and some even claim to be already ‘doing it’. However, in the government task force and among experts close to it there has been a feeling that anyone saying that they are doing ‘level 3’ is misguided. The two primary arguments for this are:
*Requirements for level 3 have not been formally defined but we now know the proposed mechanism for doing this.
*Secondly, and more pragmatically the (standard) legal relationships and process protocols do not exist and this is high on the agenda for then new organisation.

Heretofore the closest to the thumbnail sketch on the maturity diagram (fig 8) of what level 3 might be like is probably examples where the entire process from land holding and developing through design and construction and including asset management rest within one singe company or family of companies in a kind of benign dictatorship. What this facilitates is a very prescriptive approach to the ownership and use of technology so technical aspects of coordination might be resolved but, by definition, it is not an open system. More importantly, however, it is not representative of potential varied business relationships that ‘level 3’ will eventually have to service. Hopefully without falling into the trap of inventing a definition ahead of the official word on it from Digital Built Britain ; ‘level 3’ will have to service any forms of business relationships and allow them to contract with each other in a way that will create, retain and preserve legal security for the individual parties whilst allowing (encouraging even) total cooperation and collaboration.

[[File:Fig 10 Digital Built Britain.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 10 The logo to look out for on ‘level 3’ (and beyond). (from Govt. BIM Task force web site)

Some early work on level 3 is looking beyond (level 4?) in order to set the scene for Big Data engagement. The BIM agenda has methodically considered the cycle of development transition from Capital Expenditure (CAP EX) to Operational Expenditure (OPEX) (Fig 9). Connecting the data that drives this process into the immediate environment and then beyond that brings forward the concept of Total Expenditure (TOT EX) which is inclusive of many other issues such as social, economic and sustainability at a community level as is included within BREEAM and in particular the BREEAM Communities scheme [23] which has been developed to find sustainable ways of addressing 21st century challenges like urbanisation and climate change. It covers economic, social and environmental sustainability – assessing issues like housing provision, transport networks, community facilities, and economic impact. It makes sure that sustainability is considered at the very early stages of design where site-wide solutions can have a big impact. BREEAM Communities and indeed the family of BREEAM schemes, can potentially be developed to be both provider and user of data in the quest for continual improvement through feedback, assimilation and application loops.

[[File:Fig 11 BREEAM Communities Coverage.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 11. BREEAM Communities coverage which can provide a ready basis for the concept of ‘Tot Ex’

= '''Conclusion''' =

This paper is based on historical and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that. In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely available to enrich lives socially and in enterprise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology. BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

This paper started with an iconic photograph from the 1960s so it might be fitting to end with the final passage from a poem that, albeit written some time before and was never quite so iconic, became popular with the new ‘environmentalists ‘ of that era.

From “The Beaks of Eagles” by Robinson Jeffers 1887 -1962

''It is good for man '' ''To try all changes, progress and corruption, powers, peace and anguish, ''

''not to go down the dinosaur's way '' ''Until all his capacities have been explored: ''

''and it is good for him '' ''To know that his needs and nature are no more changed in fact in ten thousand years than the beaks of eagles.''

= CPIc definition for BIM =

Building Information Modelling is digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility creating a shared knowledge resource for information about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle, from earliest conception to demolition.

From paper “Drawing is Dead – long live modelling” [http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/ http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/]

----

This article was created by --[[User%3ABRE%20Group|User:BRE_Group]]

= References =
*[1] "From the dawn of civilization to 2003, five exabytes (1018) of data were created. The same amount was created in the last two days." Google CEO Eric Schmidt speaking in the keynote presentation at the Guardian's Activate summit 2010, which addressed "society, humanity, technology and the Web"
*[2] Brundtland is probably the most widely accepted formal definition. The first part of this is: ''"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”''
*[3] Main hypothesis of A Report for the Government Construction Client Group – BIM working strategy Client Group 2011
*[4] Big Data is generally reckoned to be collections of data beyond current data handling capability and as such is constantly advancing. Gartner(US IT research and advisory organisation) defines it as: “Big data is high volume, high velocity, and/or high variety information assets that require new forms of processing to enable enhanced decision making, insight discovery and process optimization”
*[5][https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf]
*[6] This term is the widely used to mean ‘confrontational and antagonistic’ implying something negative; and is used in this manner in this paper. However, technically the UK legal system is classified as ‘adversarial’ (in contrast to the inquisitorial system such as Napoleonic Law in much of Europe) so in the pure contextual definition of the word it does not confer anything negative.
*[7] A survey of 60,000 UK IT budget holders undertaken by the Journal ‘Computer Weekly’ stated: “Large construction firms spend an average of £10,285 per desktop each year on IT - more than 20% above the UK-wide business average of £8,455. This differential is even more marked in small and medium sized construction firms, where the average spend is £5,307 per desktop against an SME industry average of £3,132.”
*[8] CPIc is the Construction Project Information Committee, responsible for providing best practice guidance on the content, form and preparation of construction production information (CPI), and making sure this best practice is disseminated throughout the UK construction industry. It comprises representation from: RIBA, RICS, CC, ICE, CIAT, CIBSE, CIOB
*[9] Latham, M. (1994), ''Constructing the Team'', London: HMSO. ISBN 978-0-11-752994-6
*[10] Egan, J. (1998) ''Rethinking Construction: Report of the Construction Task Force'', London: HMSO
*[11] Building Down Barriers: a guide to Construction Best Practice (2003) Clive Cain; Routledge ISBN 0415289635
*[12] Types of value are taken from ''The Value handbook'' (2006) published by CABE and written by Dr Sebastian Macmillan of Eclipse Research Consultants ISBN 1 84633 0122 2
*[13] Achieving Quality on Building Sites NEDO (1987) ISBN 0729208397. Also BRE current paper 7/81 Quality control on building Sites.
*[14] ''Project information'' is defined as the information from designers necessary to tell the constructors what to build.
*[15] Augmenting Human Intellect: A conceptual framework (1962). Stanford Research Institute for the (then) US Director of Information Sciences, Air Force Office of Scientific Research.
*[16] BuildingSMART, formerly the International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI), is an international organisation which aims to improve the exchange of information between software applications used in the construction industry
*[17] Link to view video (current April 2015):- [http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html]
*[18] Building SMART has developed Industry Foundation Classes (IFCs) as a neutral and open specification for Building Information Models
*[19] Government construction Strategy: (2011) Cabinet Office (link current April 2015 [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf] )
*[20] Industrial strategy: government and industry in partnership. (2011) HM Government. [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/34710/12-1327-building-information-modelling.pdf Building Information Modelling]
*[21] A PAS is a Publicly Available Specification – a type of document issued by BSI to serve a number of purposes; here to get an advance version of a ‘standard’ into the marketplace for use and development ahead of its permissible publication as a BS. In this case the document contains non-normative information so has to be in circulation as a PAS for around 18 months prior to being reissued as a BS. There are a number of documents under the “1192” nomenclature and it is likely that that once all of these are available for full BS publication they may be slightly reordered into a homogeneous set.
*[22] [http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html]
*[23] [http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf]

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]

BIM - it's about the Planet - Part 1

2015-05-13T14:48:42Z

BRE Group:

'''Author: Keith Snook'''

This paper is based on historical activity and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that.

In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely avaialbe to enrich lives socially and in enterpise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology.

BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

= '''Introduction – setting the scene''' =

The majority of papers on BIM - Building Information Modelling - tend to jump straight-in from a contemporary construction industry focus and concentrate on the technology angle. We risk however losing the wider context, including forgetting for example that the construction industry exists primarily to provide a built environment to facilitate other activities. In its potential for contributing to whole life data, BIM can help remind us of this. The construction industry in the UK has been the subject of many major reports in the last 100 years and we can also forget that these for the most part have each been a reaction to dissatisfaction of either specific aspects or generally a perceived poor performance. In order to put the application of the technology involved in BIM into a context this paper reviews ways in which the industry operates to deliver its products, picking up on themes from some of the many reviews, and links this to both the development of the environmental agenda and the emergence of the era of ubiquitous data [1].

= '''The environment''' =

There is no definitive date for the start of mass awareness of the environmental agenda; for some it is the early 1960s with pioneering publications, such as ‘Silent Spring’ by Rachel Carson in 1962 and early research findings starting to demonstrate trends, for others with the creation of early ‘action funds’ such as the Environmental Defence Fund in 1967 where a steep decline in the numbers of Osprey (Sea Eagle) caused alarm. For the mass photo-news and television oriented world a photograph taken on 24 December 1968 by Bill Anders an astronaut on the Apollo 8 space mission, might well serve the purpose. 

[[File:Fig 1 Earthrise.jpg|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 1 “Earthrise” (Image available freely from NASA)

With the barren lunar landscape in its foreground it symbolised the frailty of blue planet Earth and stimulated debate, action and awareness making it politically impossible for governments to continue to side-step the concerns previously expressed by engaged scientists and minority pressure groups. The path to where we are now has not been straight forward and agreement, particularly on action, seems to be harder to achieve notwithstanding increasing scientific consensus on imminent, predictable and irreversible effects of our influence. Of course even without the space mission(s) and the photograph we may well have arrived at the same place in our collective thinking but it provides a useful and emotive icon for the “start” particularly for those of us who remember its first publication.

So what has the environmental movement to do with BIM? Concepts initially restricted to environmental conservation have long since been supplanted by more holistic understanding of sustainable development [2] with the term “environment” being expanded to cover all that surrounds us. More often than not the term “sustainability” is left to stand on its own as the descriptor of an ambition or target. To be more than just subjective ideals, aspects of this or any other definition have to be measurable and to do that requires data. For example a popular expression is to aspire to ‘zero carbon’. The science on how to measure let alone achieve this is complex, opaque and imprecise but at least it is a concept involving a quasi-numerical value to aim at.

In the UK, the government hypothesis about BIM is direct on this. It refers specifically to carbon performance, is inclusive of economic value and is simply stated:

''“Government as a client can derive significant improvements in cost, value and carbon performance through the use of open sharable asset information” [3] ''

BIM is seen as a way of facilitating this as asset information is derived from data and some of that data will increasingly come from BIM, more will come from related data sets such as AIM (Asset Information Models) and others so far not ascribed an acronym but which will go on to be a part of ‘Big Data’ [4].

= '''What is data? ''' =

As we shall see in the context of BIM and the implementation of the current UK government construction policies leading the way for the rest of the market, particular data can be quite specifically described and identified and indeed this is what most of the activity and effort has been about; but more generally what is it and how does BIM data fit into the wider ‘open data’ initiatives?

Data is a plural of datum which means fact. It is generally represented by digits and symbols and theoretically if kept to this simplicity it is universally interpretable. The term is also used to represent values in a qualified form such that increasing the level of qualification decreases the universality of interpretation. So in this common use of the term it enters a grey zone between its purest form and information; this grey zone becomes an important issue in compatibility of systems that operate with the data. Information is knowledge that makes sense and produces meaningful results from data.

= '''Ubiquitous data''' =

That UK government statement does not say ‘BIM’ directly and that is where the notion of ubiquitous data enters the argument: Data is now everywhere and we do not know (yet) how best to use most of it creatively. Ubiquitous data includes social, mobile, big data, analytics, cloud, software as a service, process, and more recently, the [http://successfulworkplace.com/2012/11/05/microsoft-missed-out-on-the-internet-of-things-are-you-ready/ Internet of Things]. In forty years we’ve moved from an analogue society of paper and fixed telephone to a place where we are rapidly representing, our entire world as a digital landscape. Indeed the Earthrise photograph, or at least how it got to be taken, can be emblematic of this aspect too. The equivalent to the rooms of computing power at the time of that mission can now be installed in one device along with equivalent in digital storage of the paper drawings and specifications that would have been produced to create the Saturn launch vehicle used in the mission. Even more contemporarily it could be held in ‘the cloud’ and rapidly accessed on a smart-phone. 

[[File:Fig 2 Digital infrastructures illustration of Facebook activity in 2010.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 2 Digital infrastructures – illustration of Facebook activity in 2010 (published as creative commons by Mark Zuckerberg; founder and CEO of Facebook)

Digital infrastructures have to support our ideas and interactions and be expansive so that through them we can make sense of everything physical, such as location, direction, acceleration, presence, contact, pressure, proximity, texture, temperature, gestures, odour, sound and nothing (absence of anything presently measurable). Sensors, applications, logs, and human interactions feed the process which in turn enables automation and human decision making. Analysis cycle times reduce and are more precise and so better inform decisions, help eliminate waste and error and enable enhanced interaction in a measured physical world. This is all with us now in popular applications that we have already begun to take for granted such as (often free) route planning and recording apps for our Smart Phones that relate personal data (age, weight, heart rate etc) to GPS data for example and produce information such a power output, calories burned and much more. Similar may not be overtly happening in construction but the fuel for this technology is data and BIM is data. Data about our built environment and whilst its present use, primarily in the service of construction design and process might hardly dent the above aspirations or comparisons, its adoption into full life cycles will make it become ever more significant and part of the ‘Big Data’ jigsaw puzzle.

= '''Open Data''' =

The word ‘open’ indicates a significant move encouraging openness for the greater good in contrast to existing norms that emphasise ownership and advantage. Clearly commercial advantage and intellectual right continues to be important and respected but the movement is about freeing up all that does not genuinely need such protection. In the UK the Cabinet Office published the Open Data Strategy in June 2012 and hot on its heels the Open Data Institute (ODI) was founded in by Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Professor Nigel Shadbolt with £10m start-up funding (2012 – 2017) from the Technology Strategy Board. It is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, company limited by guarantee with the aim of catalysing the evolution of open data culture to create economic, environmental, and social value. It helps unlock supply, generates demand, creates and disseminates knowledge to address local and global issues through collaboration, incubation, nurturing and mentoring new ideas, and promoting innovation.

Internationally the G8 Nations Open Data Strategy and Charter [5] (2013) sets out a set of principles that will be the foundation for access to, and the release and re-use of, data made available by G8 governments. They are: 
*Open Data by Default 
*Quality and Quantity
*Useable by All 
*Releasing Data for Improved Governance
*Releasing Data for Innovation 

= '''IT in construction''' =

It is often said that the construction industry is behind other industries in its use of IT and at face value this is probably true though such statements are often supported by uncomfortable comparisons and lack of understanding of some of the issues. The complexity and transient nature of the relationships involved in the construction of the built environment is generally held as a reason (or excuse depending on viewpoint) for this backwardness. The industry has remained disjointed in its business structures and adversarial [6] in the legal frameworks that relate the parts to the whole. In this context it is unsurprising that the various fragmented parts of the total process have apparently been reluctant to invest [7] in IT solutions that themselves have been for the most part aimed at providing particular business-discrete or process-discrete applications.

For example even with BIM and its implication of collaboration the term “lonely BIM”, used to describe one discipline working in isolation with the technology, is not generally used as one might think in a pejorative way but used more to suggest that the protagonist is heroically doing the best they can under the circumstances. However logical there has been very little imperative or obvious reward for anyone to beneficially own the unification of the discrete parts. Where it is addressed the business model is typically to cover the costs from deflecting the process risks and the methodology has been invariably through exercising quite punitive contractual relationships rather than creative management processes. Similarly and confronted with such a marketplace there have been few incentives for the IT industry to present solutions or for any individual parts of the construction industry to commission holistic solutions. Any efforts, and there have been some, have largely been left to small bands of enthusiasts, sometimes ‘borrowing’ time from understanding and sympathetic employers and a few academics. The passion behind essentially pro-bono efforts and the preciousness of academia can sometimes prove as divisive as the commercial pressures that their efforts set out to question. 

Many official reports on the industry identified the structural weaknesses as contributory to habitual ingrained and almost anticipated poor performance. Evidence for this occurred in the application of first construction industry Key Performances Indicators (KPIs) in the early 2000s. There was some pressure to have certain performance measures, particularly related to design issues, which could score more than 10/10 in order to highlight those cases where, for example, good design has genuinely created something that significantly exceeds demands and expectations. The mathematical logic of this approach was not unreasonably questioned but reluctantly there was agreement to include instead some additional questions in the data collection of the kind “did the performance exceed expectations”. This missed the point being pursued but was enlightening in another way. What subsequently happened was that this box was quite frequently selected but accompanying very ‘middling’ numerical scores indicating that expectations of the industry are institutionally low. 

What should be a turning point, albeit that there are still threats from ingrained cultures and custom is the confluence of: 
*IT in the form of BIM (and systems that surround it),
*IT in the rapid growth and use of digital media particularly in a social setting which is informing more formal processes and facilitating blisteringly rapid change,
*Emerging patronage for new processes in construction that challenge the status quo.

These now occupy the same space and the timetabled ramped approach to the technology aspects (see Fig 4) also helps provide a platform to address the industry cultural and custom issues by the provision of authoritative guidance. 

= '''UK construction industry operation''' =

The Coordinated Project Information codes were issued in 1987 and included a promotional video the opening scene of which is an animation of soldiers at the battle-front in the Crimea (~1850s). They are sending a vitally important message via several messengers to battalion HQ: ''“Send reinforcements – we are going to advance”''. Through various stages of distortion and mishearing that message arrives at HQ as ''“Send three and four pence – we are going to a dance”''.

[[File:Fig 3 the early CPI and coordinated documents.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 3 the early CPI (large logo) and coordinated documents (small logo)

This simple, humorous, often quoted and no doubt apocryphal scene captures one of the most significant issues that construction has failed to convincingly address. As an industry it has risen to all kinds of technical challenges, produced the most spectacular feats of engineering and breathtaking architecture and design; but it has failed to get its communications working effectively. There have been many efforts to both identify the difficulties and address them with perfectly reasonable, logical and sometimes pragmatic guidance. 

= '''Industry reviews - Lutyens to Egan – a selection''' =
*Not technically a review but a good line-in-the-sand starting point; renowned and respected architect Edwin Lutyens (1869 – 1944) in a frustrated response to a richly artistic but information poor trend in architectural drawings of the time said ''“ a working drawing is a letter to builder telling precisely what to build not a picture to charm….”''
*''“''The Bossom Report” – formally titled:'' Reaching for the Skies ''1934 identified fragmentation, inefficiency and adversarialism as the critical problems
*“The Simon Report” – formally titled:'' The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1944 in addressing the plans for post war rebuilding clearly equated lowest tender methods with lower standards and identified insufficient pre contract preparation and problems of indefinite and inequitable sub contracts.
*“The Banwell Report” – (also) formally titled: ''The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1964 recommended what we would now refer to as more collaborative processes using less adversarial relationships.
*“The Tavistock Report” - formally titled: ''Interdependence and Uncertainty: A study of the building industry,'' 1966 noted the crippling effect of fragmentation (and actually rather summed it all up in its imaginative title).
*“The PIG Report” - formally titled: ''Project Information - its content and arrangement A report and proposals on the way forward'' 1978 By the Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination. This also called on research such as that reported in ''BRE Current Paper 18/73 “Working drawings in use” ''and ''BRE Current Paper 60/76 “Coordinating working drawings'' and went on to recommend (and fund) the creation of the CPI documents mentioned above and to set up the interdisciplinary body that maintains their contemporary versions and other publications and services to this day - CPIc[8] (fig 3) 
*Latham 1994 [9] and Egan 1998 [10] again recognised the issues and, among other observations, both authors effectively said to the industry “why have you not adopted these (CPI) protocols?”. On neither occasion did the industry provide a reasoned response to the question. 

These are a selection of the better known reports and, in the light of what has transpired, one might only say ‘influential’ with some qualification.

= '''“Avanti” and “Building Down Barriers”''' =

In a programme funded by the then Department of Trade and Industry (DTI 2002) the CPI protocols were used in a mandated way on a series of projects. Otherwise they were all ‘ordinary’ building projects with a spread of technologies across what we would now call level 0 and 1 with a hint of level 2 on some as defined in fig 4 – the Bew - Richards BIM maturity graph. The projects were all fairly conventional, and used normal professional appointments, contractual arrangements, insurances, penalties etc. The programme was called ''Avanti – ICT enabled collaborative working'', and the only difference compared to other projects of the time was that they were each facilitated by individual mentors who knew the ins and outs of the relevant protocols including some that were in draft at that time such as documentation that was to evolve into BS1192 – 2007. 

[[File:Fig 4 BIM Maturity copyright obtained Bew Richards.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 4 BIM Maturity Graph in an early published form – Copyright obtained Bew Richards

Avanti reported in 2007 and on average showed savings in line with those expected in the current BIM programme of around 20 – 25%. Individual savings recorded for particular activities were even more startling: 
*Early commitment offering up to 80% saving on implementation cost on medium size project
*50-85% saving on effort spent receiving information and formatting for reuse
*60-80% saving on effort spent finding information and documents
*75-80% saving in effort to achieve design co-ordination
*50% saving on time spent to assess tenders and award sub-contracts
*50% saving on effort in sub-contractor design approval

A further initiative with a promising title "Buidling down Barriers" [11] analysed the reasons for ‘initiative failures’ of the past and ironically also predicted its own failure in an early passage where it stated:

''“The reason why the numerous reports between 1929 and 1994 have failed to have any impact on the performance of the construction industry is because the industry continues to be blind to its failings. It is also unwilling to measure its performance, particularly the impact of fragmentation and adversarial attitudes.”'' 

''Building Down Barriers'' also had good patronage from the UK military as a very experienced client for a substantial built portfolio but even with its backing through demonstration projects and rather like Avanti, ''Building Down Barriers'' was seen by the rest of the industry primarily as a research experiment – exciting, fulfilling and a glimpse of a possible future for those involved but with the majority of them subsequently moving on to new projects procured and operated in a conventional way. Exposure to these projects slightly swelled the ranks of those individuals convinced by the methods and committed to improvements but they were still very much in the minority and mostly then with very little influence in the face of the complacency identified in that passage from the report. However with the emergence of the current government stimulated “BIM agenda” a gratifying number of those involved in or having knowledge of both ''Avanti'' and ''Building down Barriers'' and other research have emerged and, several years on, are operating in positions of influence. 

= '''Value and Quality''' =

 

'''Value = What you get''' / '''What you give''' 

albeit that he notes that subjective and personal assessments for measuring the quantities of “what you get” and “what you give” must be used. Clearly, a result greater than unity is a positive (good) value outcome and less than unity is negative (bad). 

Value can be broken down to various types as identified by Dr Sebastian Macmillan in ''The value handbook'' [12]''. Exchange value'' is easy to quantify monetarily for example (it is often referred to as ‘book value’ and will appear on asset registers) and there are systems such as BREEAM that address ''environmental value'' in quantifiable terms. ''Image value'' can generally be assessed in context by those to whom it is important and for some endeavours ''use value'' might conform to a fairly precise algorithm, eg factory efficiency, but ''social value'' and ''cultural value'' may be difficult to reduce to simple monetary terms. 

Quality is technically fairly easy to define (there is a British Standard / ISO definition) and measure but the difficulty comes more from misuse as the term is often used loosely for example to describe gratuitous opulence rather than effectiveness or fitness for purpose or even beauty. Government funded research at BRE contemporary with that for the CPI codes focused on a long term objective and observational study of the achievement of quality on UK construction sites and produced interesting results that did not support common perception. The emphasis on objective research is important in this. Research based on typical survey or structured interview techniques as would be more likely now would have probably produced different results for the same reasons as the failure to adopt better working practices noted in the ''Building Down Barriers''. The construction industry has not embraced attempts at self-contemplation or measurement and has taken precious little notice of any applied to it by third parties, including BRE even when it was a government funded research laboratory. Therefore the industry self-perception, which is what inquisitorial rather than observational techniques tend to expose, is likely to provide a biased picture. The BRE research [13] contradicted commonly cited industry rhetoric which often displayed almost feudal attitudes in placing responsibility for failures with trades people or other operatives as a default. The research, which was not distracted by industry opinions or prejudices, showed that management and professional failures to do with information are responsible for far more compromises of the quality of the product than those directly caused by site works or operatives. On the issue of skill for example it found that there was abundant skill in those properly trained for the job albeit at times there were simply not enough skilled people to match workloads. By far the single largest culprit for failures of quality however was ''missing or inadequate project information ''[14]''.'' Which again directs us to consider BIM and particularly the UK government led initiative which emanates from the Government Construction Strategy. 

= '''The technology''' =

What we now know as BIM may not go quite as far back as the Lutyens quote but certainly goes back to the 1960s – the era of “Banwell” and “Tavistock”. Put very simplistically, and perhaps even patronisingly, the development of computing has in part been a story of a universal solution with huge potential looking for problems to address. Applications in manufacturing are familiar and there were enlightened thinkers from both computing and construction who had realised that the built environment would also be a very likely place. Indeed not just the “built environment” but environment more generally as developments in mapping (Geographic Information Systems – GIS) have run in parallel with those for construction. The first mass impact of computing was to business generally where computers were enthusiastically introduced to automate tedious tasks. This put computers inside organisations and increased their familiarity. It was also the start of the idea of integrated business systems with forward thinkers envisaging a situation where data would only emerge for uses that require human intervention and not for it to re-emerge for such things as transfer between operations if no human intervention was necessary. This is an ideal we are still pursuing, its original conception having been severely hampered by the development of competing proprietary systems for the most part addressing solitary purposes and functions and parts of complex processes rather than the whole. This would also become an issue with CAD and BIM systems.

For construction, creating detailed technical drawings (as distinct from design drawings) was identified as one of those “tedious tasks” and application of computing to this became CAD in the form Computer Aided Drafting. The same acronym is used for Computer Aided Design with many confusingly using the two synonymously. As early as 1962 Douglas C. Englebart makes suggestions of the shift from just Drafting to Design in his paper ''Augmenting Human Intellect'' [15]. Perhaps being an engineer rather than an architect himself his cited ‘architectural design’ example, focuses on technical rather than aesthetic design aspects.

''“The architect next begins to enter a series of specifications and data – a six-inch slab floor, twelve-inch concrete walls eight feet high within the excavation, and so on. When he has finished, the revised scene appears on the screen. A structure is taking shape. He examines it, adjusts it. These lists grow into an ever more-detailed, interlinked structure, which represents the maturing thought behind the actual design.”'' 

It does however introduce concepts of what we now know as parametric object based design involving a relational database; or (now) BIM for short. 

In construction and with the move from research into viable commercial systems during the 1970s and 80s much of the development activity became directed towards further reducing the tedium and cost of drafting and, for the more forward thinking, creating parametrically accurate objects linked to other relevant data. Virtually all development however had the objective of producing reliable drawings, and schedules, to fit into the normal contractual, legal and business processes of construction whether in the UK, US or Europe (or elsewhere – Finland for example has always been at the forefront of the subject). With much of it having been based in research and at that time there being little imperative for considering open or interoperable systems, improvements continued in the computing aspects and software advanced (within the scope of also rapidly improving hardware) but the end game was still servicing the industry business norms and to a limited extent advancements in visualisations and graphical rendering. Whilst the earlier list of reports and the sometimes bleak messages within them about these norms is confined to the UK, most other regions had broadly similar issues with interdisciplinary relationships and there was little reference to using information technology to address these issues. Perhaps there should have been more in that the sponsoring body for the 1978 UK “PIG” report was the “Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination”, but the report focused on the observed problems, with frequent references to BRE research, and bizarrely bearing in mind the scope implied in its title, did not mention computer applications. 

Another aspect, particularly in respect of commercial development in the early years was the human/computer interface and there was a period when the software and processing power/potential was running well ahead of this aspect as in the laboratory interface issues are generally not such an imperative. A watershed occurred between 1980 and 1985 in the commercial application of interface systems, led by the mouse, that we are familiar with now. 

In the mid to late 1980s there was a discernible split in development effort. The first was towards efficiencies in the construction process which is where the first references to time being the 4th dimension in what was to become BIM were made. The other was continued development of design aspects and simulations. 

= '''Becoming virtual''' =

In 1982 in Budapest, Hungary, work started on what is generally reckoned to be the first BIM software. Current versions of this software are in use today, they are favoured by Mac users and used mainly on small to medium sized construction projects to which it is particularly well suited. Inspired to make something to cater for more complex projects the same group developed software which following purchase by a much larger software company in 2000 is now one of the most ubiquitous Architectural BIM authoring tools with versions for other disciplines also in the portfolio. 

Prior to this acquisition, which changed the company’s commercial landscape by adding a highly functional proprietary tool to their portfolio, the company had teamed up with the International Alliance for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability Interoperability] (IAI – later to become BuildingSmart [16]), to produce a particularly altruistic film called “The End of Babel” [17]. The film promotes open systems and particularly the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) [18] that AIA had just started to develop. It uses the famous story of the building of Babel as an analogy with the lack of system interoperability and, albeit an American production, was presented by a UK television household name of the day on technology, James Burke. From his script: 

''"The [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel Tower of Babel], one of the biggest construction projects undertaken. Designed to reach the heavens. But the engineers couldn't finish the job. Halfway through everybody working on the job was stricken with inability to understand what the other fellow was saying. They were all still talking......but they weren't communicating. That incident was supposed to have taken place in around 5,000 BC. And we've been trying to understand each other ever since''." 

That vision in the film remains an objective of the current BIM initiative in the UK and probably also elsewhere as whist it focuses on the technology and the ambition for IFCs, the underlying story is about total collaboration and cooperation in order to achieve the goal.

Another approach to design collaboration is software which is solely designed to coordinate across varying file formats and include other features such as data collection, construction simulation and clash detection.

Simulation programs, many aimed at environmental issues, have been developed that work with imported models and recently BIM authoring tools have provided inbuilt simulation capability also. More recently still the increase in hand held devices has been recognised and the niche of rapid conceptualisation using such devices is being addressed by software providers including those from outside the established construction software providers and including the power houses behind global data searching.

The last significant player (for now) in the technology support is collaboration software. The message is finally being accepted at the leading edge that the multitudes of designers, consultants, project managers, construction contractors and sub-contractors brought together in a temporary organisation for the term of a project need to be able to communicate in a controlled and reliable manner with much of that communication being at data level. Only then can they start to operate effectively and efficiently as a team. The leading providers of collaboration software have also recognised the basic project stages such as design and contract preparation, construction and contract completion and operate and maintain; and are engaged in making their tools applicable throughout it. Indeed in the UK the government is funding a master ‘digital Plan of Work’ in order that all sectors can adopt a common structure. The gulf between the information involved in the construction and operation of a facility has been identified for some time and much effort is now becoming concentrated on that.

= '''Creative tension''' =

Related to the introduction of the technology there is a tension within the education of creative designers such as architects. The argument suggests that creativity could suffer in the face of expediency and this is probably best explained by using a simple example. BIM platforms typically represent walls, for example, as objects with layers and these layers are defined in terms of the depth and height and are then extruded along the length of a line. The program then has the ability to calculate dimensional properties such as the volume of material contained within the wall assembly and to create wall sections and details easily. However by definition this type of workflow is based on the existing buildings, common industry standards and conventional technology and solutions and therefore a project which is produced in BIM authoring software which emphasises these methods is likely to reinforce existing paradigms rather than contribute to developing new ones that advance the art and science. This is, or certainly the fear of it is, further exacerbated by the proliferation of BIM Libraries which, rather like standard details in line-drawn form from previous generations, are viewed with some suspicion. 

These perceived limitations of parametric flexibility and geometry sculpting has led to the development of systems supporting non uniform rational basic splines (NURBS). These platforms have provided the power to iterate and transform for complex and provocative architectural forms and are favoured by those wishing to explore forms involving organic shapes and for projects such as those related to infrastructure where, for example, natural landform shapes inform or become a part of the design. NURBS is now increasingly incorporated into more generally available in software.

[[File:Fig 5 NURBS.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 5. NURBS surface defined by control points over a two-dimensional parameter field. (Creative commons: Wikimedia.org)

= '''BIM and the UK Government Construction Strategy [19]''' =

Whilst private sector client bodies, design consultants, construction contractors and others have variously seen advantages of BIM and implemented aspects of BIM on projects it is the Government Construction Strategy (2011) that is the authoritative origin for the government led initiative that is now the primary focus for the application of BIM in the UK. The key sentence within the strategy for this is: 

''“2.32 Government will require fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic) as a minimum by 2016''.” 

This and the detail surrounding it, not least a fully detailed “BIM strategy” [20], has taken much of the attention and an important feature is the inclusion of a premise that the government as a client for construction needs to improve and indeed become exemplary. For government this uniquely means committing to and publishing a rolling programme of procurement intentions. This is an important aspiration for an industry that is reluctant to make significant capital investment, is one of the most sensitive to economic cycles and is wary of an historic trend of being used as a fiscal regulator by successive governments. More generally and an aspect that has more potential to be replicated in the private sector is creating defined data expectations at predetermined points within individual projects (fig 6) 

[[File:Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points set against generic work stages (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

The provision of explicit individual project data provides for a greater accuracy in evaluating that work in terms of quality, time and cost. It is presumed, and at present can only be hoped, that this client facing subtlety of the whole initiative is not lost when translated for private procurement when the distinctions between capital and operational budgets or even simply short and longer term benefits generally are in apparent commercial conflict brought about by silo thinking. Government has also identified a number of projects on which to test the emerging procedures being developed to accommodate both new working practices and apply methods including BIM software. Fig 7 shows an example of a chart from one of these early projects illustrating the high level data requirements set against the project work stages (running along the top). The information or data sets that respond to the data requirements will then generate definite client actions and decisions that allow the project to progress without the lack of certainty typical in much construction procurement. 

[[File:Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements. (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

Describing the current incarnation of BIM in the UK invariably and logically starts with the “Bew/Richards maturity graph”. This has been used to guide and map the production of critical industry documentation on the subject as a part of a “roadmap” to the standards and other document development to support the implementation of BIM (fig 8). In 2014 the definitive items of such guidance for ‘level 2’ were determined. Each of these documents has further references to others necessary to complete the story. 

They are: 
*PAS,1192-2 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling [21] 
*PAS 1192-3, [http://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/Details/52072 Specification for information management for the operational phase of construction projects using building information modelling] 
*BS 1192-4, UK Implementation of COBie 
*CIC BIM protocol, 
*Government Soft Landings, 
*Classification - to be completed in 2015 
*Digital Plan of Works - to be completed in 2015 

[[File:Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph – a part of the UK roadmap for BIM. (The Roadmap from Govt. BIM Task force web site is a live document updated from time to time to reflect progress and necessary changes) 

With the clarification of this list it is possible to more positively define what ‘level 2’ BIM is and to create focused education and training to establish and test core competencies. Courses both in formative education and particularly in re-educating practitioners through CPD and other training is now taking shape. 

The most significant of the documents listed is PAS1192–2 which in large part is focused on the Information delivery cycle at fig 9. The information delivery cycle is explained in detail below and selected definitions from the Standard are also included to aid its understanding. It shows the cycle laid-out against a process plan. This plan will eventually be set out, when work is complete (mid 2015), to be the digital Plan of Work. 

An important point, probably the most important point about the development of the UK BIM maturity levels is that whilst the line between level 2 and level 3 can be, and is, described in technical terms and in terms of the information handling processes and protocols it is primarily determined by the ability to operate within normal contractual, legal and other broadly familiar arrangements up to the line. What this means is that no wholesale rewriting of construction contracts is necessary although it does encourage a change of approach and certain modification as provided for in the CIC BIM Protocol which also introduces a new task of information management which is covered in a referred document called the Outline Scope of Services for the Role of Information Management. The Protocol is a contractual document that when introduced takes precedence over existing agreements (so a fairly significant amendment to standard forms) and places an obligation on parties to provide distinct elements of their services at predetermined stages in a project. The application of the Protocol is covered in guidance also prepared by the CIC. This guidance also covers aspects of professional indemnity insurance - often cited as a stumbling block for collaborative methods. 

[[File:Fig 9 The information delivery cycle at the heart of BIM.png|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 9 The information delivery cycle that is at the heart of PAS 1192-2. (Copyright obtained from Mervyn Richards)

----

'''Notes for fig 9''' 

The information delivery cycle has two points of entry. For new build projects, at the “Need” box (top right in the fig), for projects that are part of a larger portfolio or estate, or for work on existing buildings and structures, it is at the right-hand arrow “Assessment” which draws on the information in the Asset Information Model (AIM). Here PAS1192-2, which deals with the Capital expenditure phase, references PAS1192-3, which deals with the Operational expenditure phase. These points of entry are also referenced in the Common Data Environment – CDE (central zone in the fig). The information delivery cycle (blue arrows) shows the generic process of identifying a project need, procuring and awarding a contract, mobilizing a supplier and generating production information and asset information relevant to the need. This cycle is followed for every aspect of a project, including the refinement of design information through the seven project stages shown (green). Work is on-going defining these as an accepted industry standard but well known systems such as the RIBA Plan of Work (2013) can be used.

The pale green wedge represents the CDE that collects information through the lifecycle for management, dissemination, exchange and retrieval processes.

Red circles indicate information exchanges between the project team and the employer in answer to the Plain Language questions defined in the employer’s information requirements (EIR). Information exchanges between project team members are indicated by small green circles. '''Selected definitions from PAS1192-2asset information model (AIM) ''' maintained information model used to manage, maintain and operate the asset.
*common data environment (CDE): single source of information for any given project, used to collect, manage and disseminate all relevant approved project documents for multi-disciplinary teams in a managed process
*employer’s information requirements (EIR): pre-tender document setting out the information to be delivered, and the standards and processes to be adopted by the supplier as part of the project delivery process
*information exchange: structured collection of information at one of a number of pre-defined stages of a project with defined format and fidelity
*master information delivery plan (MIDP): primary plan for when project information is to be prepared, by whom and using what protocols and procedures, incorporating all relevant task information delivery plans
*project implementation plan (PIP): statement relating to the suppliers’ IT and human resources capability to deliver the EIR
*project information model (PIM): information model developed during the design and construction phase of a project

= '''Keeping up to date''' =

Any published paper on the current development of BIM and particularly developments within the UK government strategy under the leadership of the BIM Task Group will inevitably quickly become out of date with the latest information published on the task group website [http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/ http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/] . Included among a wealth of useful information and resources on the site are reports from the case study projects under the title ‘Lessons Learned’ and these are regularly updated.

= '''Bringing it all together''' =

Harnessing IT and computing power in the name of the built environment will of course not stop here, indeed the developments will continue at a rapid rate but there is clearly a view that in terms of BIM and those issues that surround it, a watershed has been reached. The completeness, availability, accessibility and robustness of both authoritative guidance, much in the form of Standards, and commercially available tools such as, but not restricted to, BIM authoring software, is adequate to dispel objections from the industry to adopt more reliable ways of working, particularly when a strong client effectively mandates that way. This is effectively what the UK government announced in 2011 to take effect by 2016 and whilst the UK is not alone in its ambitions it is the most emphatic and certainly has made the most powerfully managed and supported statement of this kind. The general view is that because of this approach the UK has taken the international lead “in BIM” with UK originated Standards forming the basis of International Standards to be published by ISO (International Standards Organisation). This also marks the starting point for most papers about BIM.

They also very often seek a definition for what ‘BIM’ is, something that this paper has steered clear of, preferring to chart the rocky path to where we are now and leave the reader to contemplate the need for a definition. Thankfully it is generally now accepted that sales of software with BIM in or implied in its title is not a valid indication and neither is some kind of measure of 3D graphical representations, renderings or animations; much as they have their place. Almost all of the leaders in the field in the UK and many elsewhere have generally given up in trying to define BIM briefly and there is now a broad understanding that the shorthand use of the term describes something that it is about much more than software and 3D imagery. They see that it is primarily about dealing with information in all its forms accepting that much of this is exchanged as data that only needs to emerge from the various systems (inevitably utilising up to the minute IT) at operational points requiring human intervention. A number of single paragraph definitions do exist, and at the end of this paper, that offered in 2010 by CPIc is included as it is derived from a short study of a collection of other definitions and does not contradict the above understanding. However and as we have seen, in the UK various levels have been created and described in terms of evolving ‘maturity’ (fig 8) and the official ‘definition of the 2016 target “level 2” is set by a number of Standards and protocols listed previously. Einstein said that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” In respect of a definition of ‘BIM’ this seems to be a wise statement. 

= '''Summary''' =

So what we have is:
*A realisation and acceptance that the way we are using the planet is not sustainable and that buildings and infrastructure must play their part in preserving valuable and exhaustible resources.
*A latent realisation that relatively new found powers of mass data collection, exchange and analysis can help determine where activity and measures might be best focused in order to most effectively address sustainability issues.
*An industry, and that is the extended industry including suppliers, manufacturers and those responsible for managing facilities, that has historically failed to perform optimally due primarily to its fragmentation and management issues and within those particularly issues of information management. Information is made up of data.
*A market that has accepted the poor performance of the industry as the norm and has exacerbated and promoted that poor performance through its procurement and financing processes.
*Products from the industry that are sometimes stunning in their contribution to the landscape and exemplary in terms of design and function but which, across the entire range, are habitually an opaque mystery to those that use operate and maintain them.
*A catalogue of proposals from authoritative bodies (many external to the industry) that are thematically similar enough as to not be competing, contradictory or confusing that thoroughly address many of the issues but which have been largely ignored by both the industry and the market as they question customs, norms and historic vested interests.
*A set of technologies – broadly labelled ‘BIM’ – that both demand the application of some of the previously ignored proposals to operate optimally and helpfully make it easier for that to occur.
*Driven by social use as much as scientific or business use, a blisteringly rapid movement towards a world of pervasive data. Indeed the speed and intensity of this is such that at times distinctions between social, scientific and business become blurred.
*In the UK particularly but with similar elsewhere also; a client body large enough to demand a phase-change in procurement parameters and committed enough to invest in formal guidance, systems and protocols to a published timetable.
*Encouragement that, led by early stages of this phase-change, the UK is reckoned to have taken the lead in meaningful BIM implementation [22].

= '''The future - “Level 3?”''' =

Relating back to the levels of the maturity diagram (fig 8), what about level 3?

A part of the success of the UK initiative is concentrating minds on the presently doable, and more importantly useful, in order to make progress in manageable step changes. Because of this it has been difficult to get any firm information on level 3 and what it will look like. However, on 26 February 2015 the launch of Digital Built Britain, the UK Level 3 Building Information Modelling program was announced by Rt Hon Dr Vince Cable. The press release said: “The work will build a digital economy for the construction industry in support of dramatically improving delivery, operations and services provided to citizens. The programme will build on the standards and savings delivered by the BIM level 2 initiative which has been central to the £840M savings achieved on central public spend in 2013/14.” A new website has been established at [http://digital-built-britain.com/ http://digital-built-britain.com/].

Many in the industry had filled-in the level 3 void using their own imaginations as to what it might be and some even claim to be already ‘doing it’. However, in the government task force and among experts close to it there has been a feeling that anyone saying that they are doing ‘level 3’ is misguided. The two primary arguments for this are:
*Requirements for level 3 have not been formally defined but we now know the proposed mechanism for doing this.
*Secondly, and more pragmatically the (standard) legal relationships and process protocols do not exist and this is high on the agenda for then new organisation.

Heretofore the closest to the thumbnail sketch on the maturity diagram (fig 8) of what level 3 might be like is probably examples where the entire process from land holding and developing through design and construction and including asset management rest within one singe company or family of companies in a kind of benign dictatorship. What this facilitates is a very prescriptive approach to the ownership and use of technology so technical aspects of coordination might be resolved but, by definition, it is not an open system. More importantly, however, it is not representative of potential varied business relationships that ‘level 3’ will eventually have to service. Hopefully without falling into the trap of inventing a definition ahead of the official word on it from Digital Built Britain ; ‘level 3’ will have to service any forms of business relationships and allow them to contract with each other in a way that will create, retain and preserve legal security for the individual parties whilst allowing (encouraging even) total cooperation and collaboration.

[[File:Fig 10 Digital Built Britain.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 10 The logo to look out for on ‘level 3’ (and beyond). (from Govt. BIM Task force web site)

Some early work on level 3 is looking beyond (level 4?) in order to set the scene for Big Data engagement. The BIM agenda has methodically considered the cycle of development transition from Capital Expenditure (CAP EX) to Operational Expenditure (OPEX) (Fig 9). Connecting the data that drives this process into the immediate environment and then beyond that brings forward the concept of Total Expenditure (TOT EX) which is inclusive of many other issues such as social, economic and sustainability at a community level as is included within BREEAM and in particular the BREEAM Communities scheme [23] which has been developed to find sustainable ways of addressing 21st century challenges like urbanisation and climate change. It covers economic, social and environmental sustainability – assessing issues like housing provision, transport networks, community facilities, and economic impact. It makes sure that sustainability is considered at the very early stages of design where site-wide solutions can have a big impact. BREEAM Communities and indeed the family of BREEAM schemes, can potentially be developed to be both provider and user of data in the quest for continual improvement through feedback, assimilation and application loops.

[[File:Fig 11 BREEAM Communities Coverage.gif|RTENOTITLE]]

Fig 11. BREEAM Communities coverage which can provide a ready basis for the concept of ‘Tot Ex’

= '''Conclusion''' =

This paper is based on historical and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that. In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely available to enrich lives socially and in enterprise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology. BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

This paper started with an iconic photograph from the 1960s so it might be fitting to end with the final passage from a poem that, albeit written some time before and was never quite so iconic, became popular with the new ‘environmentalists ‘ of that era.

From “The Beaks of Eagles” by Robinson Jeffers 1887 -1962

''It is good for man '' ''To try all changes, progress and corruption, powers, peace and anguish, ''

''not to go down the dinosaur's way '' ''Until all his capacities have been explored: ''

''and it is good for him '' ''To know that his needs and nature are no more changed in fact in ten thousand years than the beaks of eagles.''

= CPIc definition for BIM =

Building Information Modelling is digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility creating a shared knowledge resource for information about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle, from earliest conception to demolition.

From paper “Drawing is Dead – long live modelling” [http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/ http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/]

----

This article was created by --[[User%3ABRE%20Group|User:BRE_Group]]

= References =
*[1] "From the dawn of civilization to 2003, five exabytes (1018) of data were created. The same amount was created in the last two days." Google CEO Eric Schmidt speaking in the keynote presentation at the Guardian's Activate summit 2010, which addressed "society, humanity, technology and the Web"
*[2] Brundtland is probably the most widely accepted formal definition. The first part of this is: ''"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”''
*[3] Main hypothesis of A Report for the Government Construction Client Group – BIM working strategy Client Group 2011
*[4] Big Data is generally reckoned to be collections of data beyond current data handling capability and as such is constantly advancing. Gartner(US IT research and advisory organisation) defines it as: “Big data is high volume, high velocity, and/or high variety information assets that require new forms of processing to enable enhanced decision making, insight discovery and process optimization”
*[5][https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf]
*[6] This term is the widely used to mean ‘confrontational and antagonistic’ implying something negative; and is used in this manner in this paper. However, technically the UK legal system is classified as ‘adversarial’ (in contrast to the inquisitorial system such as Napoleonic Law in much of Europe) so in the pure contextual definition of the word it does not confer anything negative.
*[7] A survey of 60,000 UK IT budget holders undertaken by the Journal ‘Computer Weekly’ stated: “Large construction firms spend an average of £10,285 per desktop each year on IT - more than 20% above the UK-wide business average of £8,455. This differential is even more marked in small and medium sized construction firms, where the average spend is £5,307 per desktop against an SME industry average of £3,132.”
*[8] CPIc is the Construction Project Information Committee, responsible for providing best practice guidance on the content, form and preparation of construction production information (CPI), and making sure this best practice is disseminated throughout the UK construction industry. It comprises representation from: RIBA, RICS, CC, ICE, CIAT, CIBSE, CIOB
*[9] Latham, M. (1994), ''Constructing the Team'', London: HMSO. ISBN 978-0-11-752994-6
*[10] Egan, J. (1998) ''Rethinking Construction: Report of the Construction Task Force'', London: HMSO
*[11] Building Down Barriers: a guide to Construction Best Practice (2003) Clive Cain; Routledge ISBN 0415289635
*[12] Types of value are taken from ''The Value handbook'' (2006) published by CABE and written by Dr Sebastian Macmillan of Eclipse Research Consultants ISBN 1 84633 0122 2
*[13] Achieving Quality on Building Sites NEDO (1987) ISBN 0729208397. Also BRE current paper 7/81 Quality control on building Sites.
*[14] ''Project information'' is defined as the information from designers necessary to tell the constructors what to build.
*[15] Augmenting Human Intellect: A conceptual framework (1962). Stanford Research Institute for the (then) US Director of Information Sciences, Air Force Office of Scientific Research.
*[16] BuildingSMART, formerly the International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI), is an international organisation which aims to improve the exchange of information between software applications used in the construction industry
*[17] Link to view video (current April 2015):- [http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html]
*[18] Building SMART has developed Industry Foundation Classes (IFCs) as a neutral and open specification for Building Information Models
*[19] Government construction Strategy: (2011) Cabinet Office (link current April 2015 [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf] )
*[20] Industrial strategy: government and industry in partnership. (2011) HM Government. [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/34710/12-1327-building-information-modelling.pdf Building Information Modelling]
*[21] A PAS is a Publicly Available Specification – a type of document issued by BSI to serve a number of purposes; here to get an advance version of a ‘standard’ into the marketplace for use and development ahead of its permissible publication as a BS. In this case the document contains non-normative information so has to be in circulation as a PAS for around 18 months prior to being reissued as a BS. There are a number of documents under the “1192” nomenclature and it is likely that that once all of these are available for full BS publication they may be slightly reordered into a homogeneous set.
*[22] [http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html]
*[23] [http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf]

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]

BIM - it's about the Planet - Part 1

2015-05-12T11:59:00Z

BRE Group:

'''Author: Keith Snook''' 

This paper is based on historical activity and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that. 

In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely avaialbe to enrich lives socially and in enterpise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology.

BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

= '''Introduction – setting the scene''' =

The majority of papers on BIM - Building Information Modelling - tend to jump straight-in from a contemporary construction industry focus and concentrate on the technology angle. We risk however losing the wider context, including forgetting for example that the construction industry exists primarily to provide a built environment to facilitate other activities. In its potential for contributing to whole life data, BIM can help remind us of this. The construction industry in the UK has been the subject of many major reports in the last 100 years and we can also forget that these for the most part have each been a reaction to dissatisfaction of either specific aspects or generally a perceived poor performance. In order to put the application of the technology involved in BIM into a context this paper reviews ways in which the industry operates to deliver its products, picking up on themes from some of the many reviews, and links this to both the development of the environmental agenda and the emergence of the era of ubiquitous data[1]. 

= '''The environment''' =

There is no definitive date for the start of mass awareness of the environmental agenda; for some it is the early 1960s with pioneering publications, such as ‘Silent Spring’ by Rachel Carson in 1962 and early research findings starting to demonstrate trends, for others with the creation of early ‘action funds’ such as the Environmental Defence Fund in 1967 where a steep decline in the numbers of Osprey (Sea Eagle) caused alarm. For the mass photo-news and television oriented world a photograph taken on 24 December 1968 by Bill Anders an astronaut on the Apollo 8 space mission, might well serve the purpose. 

[[File:Fig 1 Earthrise.jpg|RTENOTITLE]]Fig 1 “Earthrise” (Image available freely from NASA) 

With the barren lunar landscape in its foreground it symbolised the frailty of blue planet Earth and stimulated debate, action and awareness making it politically impossible for governments to continue to side-step the concerns previously expressed by engaged scientists and minority pressure groups. The path to where we are now has not been straight forward and agreement, particularly on action, seems to be harder to achieve notwithstanding increasing scientific consensus on imminent, predictable and irreversible effects of our influence. Of course even without the space mission(s) and the photograph we may well have arrived at the same place in our collective thinking but it provides a useful and emotive icon for the “start” particularly for those of us who remember its first publication. 

So what has the environmental movement to do with BIM? Concepts initially restricted to environmental conservation have long since been supplanted by more holistic understanding of sustainable development[2] with the term “environment” being expanded to cover all that surrounds us. More often than not the term “sustainability” is left to stand on its own as the descriptor of an ambition or target. To be more than just subjective ideals, aspects of this or any other definition have to be measurable and to do that requires data. For example a popular expression is to aspire to ‘zero carbon’. The science on how to measure let alone achieve this is complex, opaque and imprecise but at least it is a concept involving a quasi-numerical value to aim at. 

In the UK, the government hypothesis about BIM is direct on this. It refers specifically to carbon performance, is inclusive of economic value and is simply stated: 

''“Government as a client can derive significant improvements in cost, value and carbon performance through the use of open sharable asset information”[3] '' 

BIM is seen as a way of facilitating this as ''a''''sset information''''' is derived from data and some of that data will increasingly come from BIM, more will come from related data sets such as AIM (Asset Information Models) and others so far not ascribed an acronym but which will go on to be a part of ‘Big Data’[4]. 

= '''What is data? ''' =

As we shall see in the context of BIM and the implementation of the current UK government construction policies leading the way for the rest of the market, particular data can be quite specifically described and identified and indeed this is what most of the activity and effort has been about; but more generally what is it and how does BIM data fit into the wider ‘open data’ initiatives?

Data is a plural of datum which means fact. It is generally represented by digits and symbols and theoretically if kept to this simplicity it is universally interpretable. The term is also used to represent values in a qualified form such that increasing the level of qualification decreases the universality of interpretation. So in this common use of the term it enters a grey zone between its purest form and information; this grey zone becomes an important issue in compatibility of systems that operate with the data. Information is knowledge that makes sense and produces meaningful results from data. 

= '''Ubiquitous data''' =

That UK government statement does not say ‘BIM’ directly and that is where the notion of ubiquitous data enters the argument: Data is now everywhere and we do not know (yet) how best to use most of it creatively. Ubiquitous data includes social, mobile, big data, analytics, cloud, software as a service, process, and more recently, the [http://successfulworkplace.com/2012/11/05/microsoft-missed-out-on-the-internet-of-things-are-you-ready/ Internet of Things]. In forty years we’ve moved from an analogue society of paper and fixed telephone to a place where we are rapidly representing, our entire world as a digital landscape. Indeed the Earthrise photograph, or at least how it got to be taken, can be emblematic of this aspect too. The equivalent to the rooms of computing power at the time of that mission can now be installed in one device along with equivalent in digital storage of the paper drawings and specifications that would have been produced to create the Saturn launch vehicle used in the mission. Even more contemporarily it could be held in ‘the cloud’ and rapidly accessed on a smart-phone. 

[[File:Fig 2 Digital infrastructures illustration of Facebook activity in 2010.gif]]Fig 2 Digital infrastructures – illustration of Facebook activity in 2010 (published as creative commons by Mark Zuckerberg; founder and CEO of Facebook) 

Digital infrastructures have to support our ideas and interactions and be expansive so that through them we can make sense of everything physical, such as location, direction, acceleration, presence, contact, pressure, proximity, texture, temperature, gestures, odour, sound and nothing (absence of anything presently measurable). Sensors, applications, logs, and human interactions feed the process which in turn enables automation and human decision making. Analysis cycle times reduce and are more precise and so better inform decisions, help eliminate waste and error and enable enhanced interaction in a measured physical world. This is all with us now in popular applications that we have already begun to take for granted such as (often free) route planning and recording apps for our Smart Phones that relate personal data (age, weight, heart rate etc) to GPS data for example and produce information such a power output, calories burned and much more. Similar may not be overtly happening in construction but the fuel for this technology is data and BIM is data. Data about our built environment and whilst its present use, primarily in the service of construction design and process might hardly dent the above aspirations or comparisons, its adoption into full life cycles will make it become ever more significant and part of the ‘Big Data’ jigsaw puzzle. 

= '''Open Data''' =

The word ‘open’ indicates a significant move encouraging openness for the greater good in contrast to existing norms that emphasise ownership and advantage. Clearly commercial advantage and intellectual right continues to be important and respected but the movement is about freeing up all that does not genuinely need such protection. In the UK the Cabinet Office published the Open Data Strategy in June 2012 and hot on its heels the Open Data Institute (ODI) was founded in by Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Professor Nigel Shadbolt with £10m start-up funding (2012 – 2017) from the Technology Strategy Board. It is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, company limited by guarantee with the aim of catalysing the evolution of open data culture to create economic, environmental, and social value. It helps unlock supply, generates demand, creates and disseminates knowledge to address local and global issues through collaboration, incubation, nurturing and mentoring new ideas, and promoting innovation.

Internationally the G8 Nations Open Data Strategy and Charter[5] (2013) sets out a set of principles that will be the foundation for access to, and the release and re-use of, data made available by G8 governments. They are: 
*Open Data by Default 
*Quality and Quantity
*Useable by All 
*Releasing Data for Improved Governance
*Releasing Data for Innovation 

= '''IT in construction''' =

It is often said that the construction industry is behind other industries in its use of IT and at face value this is probably true though such statements are often supported by uncomfortable comparisons and lack of understanding of some of the issues. The complexity and transient nature of the relationships involved in the construction of the built environment is generally held as a reason (or excuse depending on viewpoint) for this backwardness. The industry has remained disjointed in its business structures and adversarial[#_edn6 [vi]] in the legal frameworks that relate the parts to the whole. In this context it is unsurprising that the various fragmented parts of the total process have apparently been reluctant to invest[7] in IT solutions that themselves have been for the most part aimed at providing particular business discrete or process discrete applications. For example even with BIM and its implication of collaboration the term “lonely BIM”, used to describe one discipline working in isolation with the technology, is not generally used as one might think in a pejorative way but used more to suggest that the protagonist is doing the best they can under the circumstances. However logical there has been very little imperative or obvious reward for anyone to beneficially own the unification of the discrete parts. Where it is addressed the business model is typically to cover the costs from deflecting the process risks and the methodology has been invariably through exercising quite punitive contractual relationships rather than creative management processes. Similarly and confronted with such a marketplace there have been few incentives for the IT industry to present solutions or for any individual parts of the construction industry to commission holistic solutions. Any efforts, and there have been some, have largely been left to small bands of enthusiasts, sometimes ‘borrowing’ time from understanding and sympathetic employers and a few academics. The passion behind essentially pro-bono efforts and the preciousness of academia can sometimes prove as divisive as the commercial pressures that their efforts set out to question. 

Many official reports on the industry identified the structural weaknesses as contributory to habitual ingrained and almost anticipated poor performance. Evidence for this occurred in the application of first construction industry Key Performances Indicators (KPIs) in the early 2000s. There was some pressure to have certain performance measures, particularly related to design issues, which could score more than 10/10 in order to highlight those cases where, for example, good design has genuinely created something that significantly exceeds demands and expectations. The mathematical logic of this approach was not unreasonably questioned but reluctantly there was agreement to include instead some additional questions in the data collection of the kind “did the performance exceed expectations”. This missed the point being pursued but was enlightening in another way. What subsequently happened was that this box was quite frequently selected but accompanying very ‘middling’ numerical scores indicating that expectations of the industry are institutionally low. 

What should be a turning point, albeit that there are still threats from ingrained cultures and custom is the confluence of: 
*IT in the form of BIM (and systems that surround it),
*IT in the rapid growth and use of digital media particularly in a social setting which is informing more formal processes and facilitating blisteringly rapid change,
*Emerging patronage for new processes in construction that challenge the status quo.

These now occupy the same space and the timetabled ramped approach to the technology aspects (see Fig 4) also helps provide a platform to address the industry cultural and custom issues by the provision of authoritative guidance. 

= '''UK construction industry operation''' =

The Coordinated Project Information codes were issued in 1987 and included a promotional video the opening scene of which is an animation of soldiers at the battle-front in the Crimea (~1850s). They are sending a vitally important message via several messengers to battalion HQ: ''“Send reinforcements – we are going to advance”''. Through various stages of distortion and mishearing that message arrives at HQ as ''“Send three and four pence – we are going to a dance”''.

[[File:Fig 3 the early CPI and coordinated documents.gif]]Fig 3 the early CPI (large logo) and coordinated documents (small logo)

This simple, humorous often quoted and no doubt apocryphal scene captures one of the most significant issues that construction has failed to convincingly address. As an industry it has risen to all kinds of technical challenges, produced the most spectacular feats of engineering and breathtaking architecture and design; but it has failed to get its communications working effectively. There have been many efforts to both identify the difficulties and address them with perfectly reasonable, logical and sometimes pragmatic guidance. 

= '''Industry reviews - Lutyens to Egan – a selection''' =
*Not technically a review but a good line-in-the-sand starting point; renowned and respected architect Edwin Lutyens (1869 – 1944) in a frustrated response to a richly artistic but information poor trend in architectural drawings of the time said ''“ a working drawing is a letter to builder telling precisely what to build not a picture to charm….”''
*''“''The Bossom Report” – formally titled:'' Reaching for the Skies ''1934 identified fragmentation, inefficiency and adversarialism as the critical problems
*“The Simon Report” – formally titled:'' The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1944 in addressing the plans for post war rebuilding clearly equated lowest tender methods with lower standards and identified insufficient pre contract preparation and problems of indefinite and inequitable sub contracts.
*“The Banwell Report” – (also) formally titled: ''The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1964 recommended what we would now refer to as more collaborative processes using less adversarial relationships.
*“The Tavistock Report” - formally titled: ''Interdependence and Uncertainty: A study of the building ''''industry''''' 1966 noted the crippling effect of fragmentation (and actually rather summed it all up in its imaginative title).
*“The PIG Report” - formally titled: ''Project Information - its content and arrangement A report and proposals on the way forward'' 1978 By the Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination. This also called on research such as that reported in ''BRE Current Paper 18/73 “Working drawings in use” ''and ''BRE Current Paper 60/76 “Coordinating working drawings'' and went on to recommend (and fund) the creation of the CPI documents mentioned above and to set up the interdisciplinary body that maintains their contemporary versions and other publications and services to this day - CPIc[8]] (fig 3) 
*Latham 1994[9] and Egan 1998[10] again recognised the issues and, among other observations, both authors effectively said to the industry “why have you not adopted these (CPI) protocols?”. On neither occasion did the industry provide a reasoned response to the question. 

These are a selection of the better known reports and, in the light of what has transpired, one might only say ‘influential’ with some qualification.

= '''“Avanti” and “Building Down Barriers”''' =

In a programme funded by the then Department of Trade and Industry (DTI 2002) the CPI protocols were used in a mandated way on a series of projects. Otherwise they were all ‘ordinary’ building projects with a spread of technologies across what we would now call level 0 and 1 with a hint of level 2 on some as defined in fig 4 – the Bew - Richards BIM maturity graph. The projects were all fairly conventional, and used normal professional appointments, contractual arrangements, insurances, penalties etc. The programme was called ''Avanti – ICT enabled collaborative working'', and the only difference compared to other projects of the time was that they were each facilitated by individual mentors who knew the ins and outs of the relevant protocols including some that were in draft at that time such as documentation that was to evolve into BS1192 – 2007. 

[[File:Fig 4 BIM Maturity copyright obtained Bew Richards.gif]]Fig 4 BIM Maturity Graph in an early published form – Copyright obtained Bew Richards

Avanti reported in 2007 and on average showed savings in line with those expected in the current BIM programme of around 20 – 25%. Individual savings recorded for particular activities were even more startling: 
*Early commitment offering up to 80% saving on implementation cost on medium size project
*50-85% saving on effort spent receiving information and formatting for reuse
*60-80% saving on effort spent finding information and documents
*75–80% saving in effort to achieve design co-ordination
*50% saving on time spent to assess tenders and award sub-contracts
*50% saving on effort in sub-contractor design approval

A further initiative with a promising title “''] '' analysed the reasons for ‘initiative failures’ of the past and ironically also predicted its own failure in an early passage where it stated: ''“The reason why the numerous reports between 1929 and 1994 have failed to have any impact on the performance of the construction industry is because the industry continues to be blind to its failings. It is also unwilling to measure its performance, particularly the impact of fragmentation and adversarial attitudes.”'' 

''Building Down Barriers'' also had good patronage from the UK military as a very experienced client for a substantial built portfolio but even with its backing through demonstration projects and rather like Avanti, ''Building Down Barriers'' was seen by the rest of the industry primarily as a research experiment – exciting, fulfilling and a glimpse of a possible future for those involved but with the majority of them subsequently moving on to new projects procured and operated in a conventional way. Exposure to these projects slightly swelled the ranks of those individuals convinced by the methods and committed to improvements but they were still very much in the minority and mostly then with very little influence in the face of the complacency identified in that passage from the report. However with the emergence of the current government stimulated “BIM agenda” a gratifying number of those involved in or having knowledge of both ''Avanti'' and ''Building down Barriers'' and other research have emerged and, several years on, are operating in positions of influence. 

= '''Value and Quality''' =

Value and quality come and go out of fashion as valid subjects and there was much interest from government in the ‘Value, price mechanism’ post Latham and shortly after that the Design Quality Indicators (DQIs) were developed by the Construction Industry Council (CIC) and operate to this day albeit with limited take-up. They are implicit if not prominent in the current ‘BIM agenda’ and it is worth briefly considering them further as they are poorly understood terms. Most of the industry reports previously noted concentrated on issues either directly measurable in financial terms or resolvable to financial terms with very little manipulation. The current BIM initiative quite often uses the term ‘value’ rather than ‘cost’ which is an important, though it seems often not realised, distinction that also relates to ‘quality’ and other subjective concepts. Value and quality can be difficult to measure particularly in terms that are comparable. Richard Saxon in the 2005 report ''BE Valuable'' 

'''Value = What you get''' / '''What you give''' 

albeit that he notes that subjective and personal assessments for measuring the quantities of “what you get” and “what you give” must be used. Clearly, a result greater than unity is a positive (good) value outcome and less than unity is negative (bad). 

Value can be broken down to various types as identified by Dr Sebastian Macmillan in ''The value handbook''[12]''. Exchange value'' is easy to quantify monetarily for example (it is often referred to as ‘book value’ and will appear on asset registers) and there are systems such as BREEAM that address ''environmental value'' in quantifiable terms. ''Image value'' can generally be assessed in context by those to whom it is important and for some endeavours ''use value'' might conform to a fairly precise algorithm, eg factory efficiency, but ''social value'' and ''cultural value'' may be difficult to reduce to simple monetary terms. 

Quality is technically fairly easy to define (there is a British Standard / ISO definition) and measure but the difficulty comes more from misuse as the term is often used loosely for example to describe gratuitous opulence rather than effectiveness or fitness for purpose or even beauty. Government funded research at BRE contemporary with that for the CPI codes focused on a long term objective and observational study of the achievement of quality on UK construction sites and produced interesting results that did not support common perception. The emphasis on objective research is important in this. Research based on typical survey or structured interview techniques as would be more likely now would have probably produced different results for the same reasons as the failure to adopt better working practices noted in the ''Building Down Barriers''. The construction industry has not embraced attempts at self-contemplation or measurement and has taken precious little notice of any applied to it by third parties, including BRE even when it was a government funded research laboratory. Therefore the industry self-perception, which is what inquisitorial rather than observational techniques tend to expose, is likely to provide a biased picture. The BRE research[13] contradicted commonly cited industry rhetoric which often displayed almost feudal attitudes in placing responsibility for failures with trades people or other operatives as a default. The research, which was not distracted by industry opinions or prejudices, showed that management and professional failures to do with information are responsible for far more compromises of the quality of the product than those directly caused by site works or operatives. On the issue of skill for example it found that there was abundant skill in those properly trained for the job albeit at times there were simply not enough skilled people to match workloads. By far the single largest culprit for failures of quality however was ''missing or inadequate project information''[14]''.'' Which again directs us to consider BIM and particularly the UK government led initiative which emanates from the Government Construction Strategy. 

= '''The technology''' =

What we now know as BIM may not go quite as far back as the Lutyens quote but certainly goes back to the 1960s – the era of “Banwell” and “Tavistock”. Put very simplistically, and perhaps even patronisingly, the development of computing has in part been a story of a universal solution with huge potential looking for problems to address. Applications in manufacturing are familiar and there were enlightened thinkers from both computing and construction who had realised that the built environment would also be a very likely place. Indeed not just the “built environment” but environment more generally as developments in mapping (Geographic Information Systems – GIS) have run in parallel with those for construction. The first mass impact of computing was to business generally where computers were enthusiastically introduced to automate tedious tasks. This put computers inside organisations and increased their familiarity. It was also the start of the idea of integrated business systems with forward thinkers envisaging a situation where data would only emerge for uses that require human intervention and not for it to re-emerge for such things as transfer between operations if no human intervention was necessary. This is an ideal we are still pursuing, its original conception having been severely hampered by the development of competing proprietary systems for the most part addressing solitary purposes and functions and parts of complex processes rather than the whole. This would also become an issue with CAD and BIM systems.

For construction, creating detailed technical drawings (as distinct from design drawings) was identified as one of those “tedious tasks” and application of computing to this became CAD in the form Computer Aided Drafting. The same acronym is used for Computer Aided Design with many confusingly using the two synonymously. As early as 1962 Douglas C. Englebart makes suggestions of the shift from just Drafting to Design in his paper ''Augmenting Human Intellect'' [15]. Perhaps being an engineer rather than an architect himself his cited ‘architectural design’ example, focuses on technical rather than aesthetic design aspects.

''“The architect next begins to enter a series of specifications and data–a six-inch slab floor, twelve-inch concrete walls eight feet high within the excavation, and so on. When he has finished, the revised scene appears on the screen. A structure is taking shape. He examines it, adjusts it. These lists grow into an ever more-detailed, interlinked structure, which represents the maturing thought behind the actual design.”'' 

It does however introduce concepts of what we now know as parametric object based design involving a relational database; or (now) BIM for short. 

In construction and with the move from research into viable commercial systems during the 1970s and 80s much of the development activity became directed towards further reducing the tedium and cost of drafting and, for the more forward thinking, creating parametrically accurate objects linked to other relevant data. Virtually all development however had the objective of producing reliable drawings, and schedules, to fit into the normal contractual, legal and business processes of construction whether in the UK, US or Europe (or elsewhere – Finland for example has always been at the forefront of the subject). With much of it having been based in research and at that time there being little imperative for considering open or interoperable systems, improvements continued in the computing aspects and software advanced (within the scope of also rapidly improving hardware) but the end game was still servicing the industry business norms and to a limited extent advancements in visualisations and graphical rendering. Whilst the earlier list of reports and the sometimes bleak messages within them about these norms is confined to the UK, most other regions had broadly similar issues with interdisciplinary relationships and there was little reference to using information technology to address these issues. Perhaps there should have been more in that the sponsoring body for the 1978 UK “PIG” report was the “Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination”, but the report focused on the observed problems, with frequent references to BRE research, and bizarrely bearing in mind the scope implied in its title, did not mention computer applications. 

Another aspect, particularly in respect of commercial development in the early years was the human/computer interface and there was a period when the software and processing power/potential was running well ahead of this aspect as in the laboratory interface issues are generally not such an imperative. A watershed occurred between 1980 and 1985 in the commercial application of interface systems, led by the mouse, that we are familiar with now. 

In the mid to late 1980s there was a discernible split in development effort. The first was towards efficiencies in the construction process which is where the first references to time being the 4th dimension in what was to become BIM were made. The other was continued development of design aspects and simulations. 

= '''Becoming virtual''' =

In 1982 in Budapest, Hungary, work started on what is generally reckoned to be the first BIM software. Current versions of this software are in use today, they are favoured by Mac users and used mainly on small to medium sized construction projects to which it is particularly well suited. Inspired to make something to cater for more complex projects the same group developed software which following purchase by a much larger software company in 2000 is now one of the most ubiquitous Architectural BIM authoring tools with versions for other disciplines also in the portfolio. 

Prior to this acquisition, which changed the company’s commercial landscape by adding a highly functional proprietary tool to their portfolio, the company had teamed up with the International Alliance for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability Interoperability] (IAI – later to become BuildingSmart[16]), to produce a particularly altruistic film called “The End of Babel” [17]. The film promotes open systems and particularly the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC)[18] that AIA had just started to develop. It uses the famous story of the building of Babel as an analogy with the lack of system interoperability and, albeit an American production, was presented a by UK television household name of the day on technology, James Burke. From his script: 

''"The [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel Tower of Babel], one of the biggest construction projects undertaken. Designed to reach the heavens. But the engineers couldn't finish the job. Halfway through everybody working on the job was stricken with inability to understand what the other fellow was saying. They were all still talking......but they weren't communicating. That incident was supposed to have taken place in around 5,000 BC. And we've been trying to understand each other ever since''." 

That vision in the film remains an objective of the current BIM initiative in the UK and probably also elsewhere as whist it focuses on the technology and the ambition for IFCs, the underlying story is about total collaboration and cooperation in order to achieve the goal.

Another approach to design collaboration is software which is solely designed to coordinate across varying file formats and include other features such as data collection, construction simulation and clash detection.

Simulation programs, many aimed at environmental issues, have been developed that work with imported models and recently BIM authoring tools have provided inbuilt simulation capability also. More recently still the increase in hand held devices has been recognised and the niche of rapid conceptualisation using such devices is being addressed by software providers including those from outside the established construction software providers and including the power houses behind global data searching.

The last significant player (for now) in the technology support is collaboration software. The message is finally being accepted at the leading edge that the multitudes of designers, consultants, project managers, construction contractors and sub-contractors brought together in a temporary organisation for the term of a project need to be able to communicate in controlled and reliable manner with much of that communication being at data level. Only then can they start to operate effectively and efficiently as a team. The leading providers of collaboration software have also recognised the basic project stages such as design and contract preparation, construction and contract completion and operate and maintain; and are engaged in making their tools applicable throughout it. Indeed in the UK the government is funding a master ‘digital Plan of Work’ in order that all sectors can adopt a common structure. The gulf between the information involved in the construction and operation of a facility has been identified for some time and much effort is now becoming concentrated on that.

= '''Creative tension''' =

Related to the introduction of the technology there is a tension within the education of creative designers such as architects. The argument suggests that creativity could suffer in the face of expediency and this is probably best explained by using a simple example. BIM platforms typically represent walls, for example, as objects with layers and these layers are defined in terms of the depth and height and are then extruded along the length of a line. The program then has the ability to calculate dimensional properties such as the volume of material contained within the wall assembly and to create wall sections and details easily. However by definition this type of workflow is based on the existing buildings, common industry standards and conventional technology and solutions and therefore a project which is produced in BIM authoring software which emphasizes these methods is likely to reinforce existing paradigms rather than contribute to developing new ones that advance the art and science. This is, or certainly the fear of it is, further exacerbated by the proliferation of BIM Libraries which, rather like standard details in line-drawn form from previous generations, are viewed with some suspicion. 

These perceived limitations of parametric flexibility and geometry sculpting has led to the development of systems supporting non uniform rational basic splines (NURBS). These platforms have provided the power to iterate and transform for complex and provocative architectural forms and are favoured by those wishing to explore forms involving organic shapes and for projects such as those related to infrastructure where, for example, natural landform shapes inform or become a part of the design. NURBS is now increasingly incorporated into more generally available in software.

[[File:Fig 5 NURBS.gif]]Fig 5. NURBS surface defined by control points over a two-dimensional parameter field. (Creative commons: Wikimedia.org)

= '''BIM and the UK Government Construction Strategy [19]''' =

Whilst private sector client bodies, design consultants, construction contractors and others have variously seen advantages of BIM and implemented aspects of BIM on projects it is the Government Construction Strategy (2011) that is the authoritative origin for the government led initiative that is now the primary focus for the application of BIM in the UK. The key sentence within the strategy for this is: 

''“2.32 Government will require fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic) as a minimum by 2016''.” 

This and the detail surrounding it, not least a fully detailed “BIM strategy”[20], has taken much of the attention and an important feature is the inclusion of a premise that the government as a client for construction needs to improve and indeed become exemplary. For government this uniquely means committing to and publishing a rolling programme of procurement intentions. This is an important aspiration for an industry that is reluctant to make significant capital investment, is one of the most sensitive to economic cycles and is wary of an historic trend of being used as a fiscal regulator by successive governments. More generally and an aspect that has more potential to be replicated in the private sector is creating defined data expectations at predetermined points within individual projects (fig 6) 

[[File:Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points.gif]]Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points set against generic work stages (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

The provision of explicit individual project data provides for a greater accuracy in evaluating that work in terms of quality, time and cost. It is presumed, and at present can only be hoped, that this client facing subtlety of the whole initiative is not lost when translated for private procurement when the distinctions between capital and operational budgets or even simply short and longer term benefits generally are in apparent commercial conflict brought about by silo thinking. Government has also identified a number of projects on which to test the emerging procedures being developed to accommodate both new working practices and apply methods including BIM software. Fig 7 shows an example of a chart from one of these early projects illustrating the high level data requirements set against the project work stages (running along the top). The information or data sets that respond to the data requirements will then generate definite client actions and decisions that allow the project to progress without the lack of certainty typical in much construction procurement. 

[[File:Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements.gif]]Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements. (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

Describing the current incarnation of BIM in the UK invariably and logically starts with the “Bew/Richards maturity graph”. This has been used to guide and map the production of critical industry documentation on the subject as a part of a “roadmap” to the standards and other document development to support the implementation of BIM (fig 8). In 2014 the definitive items of such guidance for ‘level 2’ were determined. Each of these documents has further references to others necessary to complete the story. 

They are: 
*PAS,1192-2 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling [21] 
*PAS 1192-3, [http://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/Details/52072 Specification for information management for the operational phase of construction projects using building information modelling] 
*BS 1192-4, UK Implementation of COBie 
*CIC BIM protocol, 
*Government Soft Landings, 
*Classification - to be completed in 2015 
*Digital Plan of Works - to be completed in 2015 

[[File:Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph.gif]]Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph – a part of the UK roadmap for BIM. (The Roadmap from Govt. BIM Task force web site is a live document updated from time to time to reflect progress and necessary changes) 

With the clarification of this list it is possible to more positively define what ‘level 2’ BIM is and to create focused education and training to establish and test core competencies. Courses both in formative education and particularly in re-educating practitioners through CPD and other training is now taking shape. 

The most significant of the documents listed is PAS1192 – 2 which in large part is focused on the Information delivery cycle at fig 9. The information delivery cycle is explained in detail below and selected definitions from the Standard are also included to aid its understanding. It shows the cycle laid-out against a process plan. This plan will eventually be set out, when work is complete (mid 2015), to be the digital Plan of Work. 

An important point, probably the most important point about the development of the UK BIM maturity levels is that whilst the line between level 2 and level 3 can be, and is, described in technical terms and in terms of the information handling processes and protocols it is primarily determined by the ability to operate within normal contractual, legal and other broadly familiar arrangements up to the line. What this means is that no wholesale rewriting of construction contracts is necessary although it does encourage a change of approach and certain modification as provided for in the CIC BIM Protocol which also introduces a new task of information management which is covered in a referred document called the Outline Scope of Services for the Role of Information Management. The Protocol is a contractual document that when introduced takes precedence over existing agreements (so a fairly significant amendment to standard forms) and places an obligation on parties to provide distinct elements of their services at predetermined stages in a project. The application of the Protocol is covered in guidance also prepared by the CIC. This guidance also covers aspects of professional indemnity insurance - often cited as a stumbling block for collaborative methods. 

[[File:Fig 9 The information delivery cycle at the heart of BIM.png]]Fig 9 The information delivery cycle that is at the heart of PAS 1192-2. (Copyright obtained from Mervyn Richards)

----

'''Notes for fig 9''' 

The information delivery cycle has two points of entry. For new build projects, at the “Need” box (top right in the fig), for projects that are part of a larger portfolio or estate, or for work on existing buildings and structures, it is at the right-hand arrow “Assessment” which draws on the information in the Asset Information Model (AIM). Here PAS1192-2, which deals with the Capital expenditure phase, references PAS1192-3, which deals with the Operational expenditure phase. These points of entry are also referenced in the Common Data Environment – CDE (central zone in the fig). The information delivery cycle (blue arrows) shows the generic process of identifying a project need, procuring and awarding a contract, mobilizing a supplier and generating production information and asset information relevant to the need. This cycle is followed for every aspect of a project, including the refinement of design information through the seven project stages shown (green). Work is on-going defining these as an accepted industry standard but well known systems such as the RIBA Plan of Work (2013) can be used.

The pale green wedge represents the CDE that collects information through the lifecycle for management, dissemination, exchange and retrieval processes.

Red circles indicate information exchanges between the project team and the employer in answer to the Plain Language questions defined in the employer’s information requirements (EIR). Information exchanges between project team members are indicated by small green circles. '''Selected definitions from PAS1192-2asset information model (AIM) ''' maintained information model used to manage, maintain and operate the asset.
*'''common data environment (CDE)''' single source of information for any given project, used to collect, manage and disseminate all relevant approved project documents for multi-disciplinary teams in a managed process
*'''employer’s information requirements (EIR)''' pre-tender document setting out the information to be delivered, and the standards and processes to be adopted by the supplier as part of the project delivery process
*'''information exchange ''' structured collection of information at one of a number of pre-defined stages of a project with defined format and fidelity
*'''master information delivery plan (MIDP) ''' primary plan for when project information is to be prepared, by whom and using what protocols and procedures, incorporating all relevant task information delivery plans
*'''project implementation plan (PIP)''' statement relating to the suppliers’ IT and human resources capability to deliver the EIR
*'''project information model (PIM) ''' information model developed during the design and construction phase of a project

= '''Keeping up to date''' =

Any published paper on the current development of BIM and particularly developments within the UK government strategy under the leadership of the BIM Task Group will inevitably quickly become out of date with the latest information published on the task group website [http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/ http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/] . Included among a wealth of useful information and resources on the site are reports from the case study projects under the title ‘Lessons Learned’ and these are regularly updated.

= '''Bringing it all together''' =

Harnessing IT and computing power in the name of the built environment will of course not stop here, indeed the developments will continue at rapid rate but there is clearly a view that in terms of BIM and those issues that surround it, that a watershed has been reached. The completeness, availability, accessibility and robustness of both authoritative guidance, much in the form of Standards, and commercially available tools such as but not restricted to BIM authoring software, is adequate to dispel objections from the industry to adopt more reliable ways of working, particularly when a strong client effectively mandates that way. This is effectively what the UK government announced in 2011 to take effect by 2016 and whilst the UK is not alone in its ambitions it is the most emphatic and certainly has made the most powerfully managed and supported statement of this kind. The general view is that because of this approach the UK has taken the international lead “in BIM” with UK originated Standards forming the basis of International Standards to be published by ISO (International Standards Organisation). This also marks the starting point for most papers about BIM.

They also very often seek a definition for what ‘BIM’ is, something that this paper has steered clear of preferring to chart the rocky path to where we are now and leave the reader to contemplate the need for a definition. Thankfully it is generally now accepted that sales of software with BIM in or implied in its title is not a valid indication and neither is some kind of measure of 3D graphical representations, renderings or animations; much as they have their place. Almost all of the leaders in the field in the UK and many elsewhere have generally given up in trying to define BIM briefly and there is now a broad understanding that the shorthand use of the term describes something that it is about much more than software and 3D imagery. They see that it is primarily about dealing with information in all its forms accepting that much of this is exchanged as data that only needs to emerge from the various systems (inevitably utilising up to the minute IT) at operational points requiring human intervention. A number of single paragraph definitions do exist and at appendix 1 that offered in 2010 by CPIc is included as it is derived from a short study of a collection of other definitions and does not contradict the above understanding. However and as we have seen, in the UK various levels have been created and described in terms of evolving ‘maturity’ (fig 8) and the official ‘definition of the 2016 target “level 2” is set by a number of Standards and protocols listed previously. Einstein said that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” In respect of a definition of ‘BIM’ this seems to be a wise statement.

= '''Summary''' =

So what we have is:
*A realisation and acceptance that the way we are using the planet is not sustainable and that buildings and infrastructure must play their part in preserving valuable and exhaustible resources.
*A latent realisation that relatively new found powers of mass data collection, exchange and analysis can help determine where activity and measures might be best focused in order to most effectively address sustainability issues.
*An industry, and that is the extended industry including suppliers, manufacturers and those responsible for managing facilities, that has historically failed to perform optimally due primarily to its fragmentation and management issues and within those particularly issues of information management. Information is made up of data.
*A market that has accepted the poor performance the industry as the norm and has exacerbated and promoted that poor performance through its procurement and financing processes.
*Products from the industry that are sometimes stunning in their contribution to the landscape and exemplary in terms of design and function but which, across the entire range, are habitually an opaque mystery to those that use operate and maintain them.
*A catalogue of proposals from authoritative bodies (many external to the industry) that are thematically similar enough as to not be competing, contradictory or confusing that thoroughly address many of the issues but which have been largely ignored by both the industry and the market as they question customs, norms and historic vested interests.
*A set of technologies – broadly labelled ‘BIM’ – that both demand the application of some of the previously ignored proposals to operate optimally and helpfully make it easier for that to occur.
*Driven by social use as much as scientific or business use, a blisteringly rapid movement towards a world of pervasive data. Indeed the speed and intensity of this is such that at times distinctions between social, scientific and business become blurred.
*In the UK particularly but with similar elsewhere also; a client body large enough to demand a phase-change in procurement parameters and committed enough to invest in formal guidance, systems and protocols to a published timetable.
*Encouragement that, led by early stages of this phase-change, the UK is reckoned to have taken the lead in meaningful BIM implementation[22].

= '''The future - “Level 3?”''' =

Relating back to the levels of the maturity diagram (fig 8), what about level 3?

A part of the success of the UK initiative is concentrating minds on the presently doable and more importantly useful in order to make progress in manageable step changes. Because of this it has been difficult to get any firm information on level 3 and what it will look like. However, on 26 February 2015 the launch of Digital Built Britain, the UK Level 3 Building Information Modelling program was announced by Rt Hon Dr Vince Cable. The press release said: “The work will build a digital economy for the construction industry in support of dramatically improving delivery, operations and services provided to citizens. The programme will build on the standards and savings delivered by the BIM level 2 initiative which has been central to the £840M savings achieved on central public spend in 2013/14.” A new website has been established at [http://digital-built-britain.com/ http://digital-built-britain.com/].

Many in the industry had filled-in the level 3 void using their own imaginations as to what it might be and some even claim to be already ‘doing it’. However, in the government task force and among experts close to it there has been a feeling that anyone saying that they are doing ‘level 3’ is misguided. The two primary arguments for this are. Requirements for level 3 have not been formally defined but we now know the proposed mechanism for doing this. Secondly, and more pragmatically the (standard) legal relationships and process protocols do not exist and this is high on the agenda for then new organisation. Heretofore the closest to the thumbnail sketch on the maturity diagram (fig 8) of what level 3 might be like is probably examples where the entire process from land holding and developing through design and construction and including asset management rest within one singe company or family of companies in a kind of benign dictatorship. What this facilitates is a very prescriptive approach to the ownership and use of technology so technical aspects of coordination might be resolved but, by definition, it is not an open system. More importantly, however, it is not representative of potential varied business relationships that ‘level 3’ will eventually have to service. Hopefully without falling into the trap of inventing a definition ahead of the official word on it from Digital Built Britain ; ‘level 3’ will have to service any forms of business relationships and allow them to contract with each other in a way that will create, retain and preserve legal security for the individual parties whilst allowing (encouraging even) total cooperation and collaboration.

[[File:Fig 10 Digital Built Britain.gif]]Fig 10 The logo to look out for on ‘level 3’ (and beyond). (from Govt. BIM Task force web site)

Some early work on level 3 is looking beyond (level 4?) in order to set the scene for Big Data engagement. The BIM agenda has methodically considered the cycle of development transition from Capital Expenditure (CAP EX) to Operational Expenditure (OPEX) (Fig 9). Connecting the data that drives this process into the immediate environment and then beyond that brings forward the concept of Total Expenditure (TOT EX) which is inclusive of many other issues such as social, economic and sustainability at a community level as is included within BREEAM and in particular the BREEAM Communities scheme [23] which has been developed to find sustainable ways of addressing 21st century challenges like urbanisation and climate change. It covers economic, social and environmental sustainability – assessing issues like housing provision, transport networks, community facilities, and economic impact. It makes sure that sustainability is considered at the very early stages of design where site-wide solutions can have a big impact. BREEAM Communities and indeed the family of BREEAM schemes, can be both provider and user of data in the quest for continual improvement through feedback, assimilation and application loops.

[[File:Fig 11 BREEAM Communities Coverage.gif]]Fig 11. BREEAM Communities coverage which can provide a ready basis for the concept of ‘Tot Ex’

= '''Conclusion''' =

This paper is based on historical and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that. In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely avaialbe to enrich lives socially and in enterpise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology. BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

This paper started with an iconic photograph from the 1960s so it might be fitting to end with the final passage from a poem that, albeit written some time before and was never quite so iconic, became popular with the new ‘environmentalists ‘ of that era.

From “The Beaks of Eagles” by Robinson Jeffers 1887 -1962

''It is good for man '' ''To try all changes, progress and corruption, powers, peace and anguish, ''

''not to go down the dinosaur's way '' ''Until all his capacities have been explored: ''

''and it is good for him '' ''To know that his needs and nature are no more changed in fact in ten thousand years than the beaks of eagles.''

 

= CPIc definition for BIM =

'''Building Information Modelling is digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility creating a shared knowledge resource for information about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle, from earliest conception to demolition.'''

From paper “Drawing is Dead – long live modelling”

[http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/ http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/]

= References =

[1] "From the dawn of civilization to 2003, five exabytes (1018) of data were created. The same amount was created in the last two days." Google CEO Eric Schmidt speaking in the keynote presentation at the Guardian's Activate summit 2010, which addressed "society, humanity, technology and the Web"

[2] Brundtland is probably the most widely accepted formal definition. The first part of this is: ''"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”''

[3] Main hypothesis of A Report for the Government Construction Client Group – BIM working strategy Client Group 2011

[4] Big Data is generally reckoned to be collections of data beyond current data handling capability and as such is constantly advancing. Gartner(US IT research and advisory organisation) defines it as: “Big data is high volume, high velocity, and/or high variety information assets that require new forms of processing to enable enhanced decision making, insight discovery and process optimization”

[5][https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf]

[6] This term is the widely used to mean ‘confrontational and antagonistic’ implying something negative; and is used in this manner in this paper. However, technically the UK legal system is classified as ‘adversarial’ (in contrast to the inquisitorial system such as Napoleonic Law in much of Europe) so in the pure contextual definition of the word it does not confer anything negative.

[7] A survey of 60,000 UK IT budget holders undertaken by the Journal ‘Computer Weekly’ stated: “Large construction firms spend an average of £10,285 per desktop each year on IT - more than 20% above the UK-wide business average of £8,455. This differential is even more marked in small and medium sized construction firms, where the average spend is £5,307 per desktop against an SME industry average of £3,132.”

[8] CPIc is the Construction Project Information Committee, responsible for providing best practice guidance on the content, form and preparation of construction production information (CPI), and making sure this best practice is disseminated throughout the UK construction industry. It comprises representation from: RIBA, RICS, CC, ICE, CIAT, CIBSE, CIOB

[9] Latham, M. (1994), ''Constructing the Team'', London: HMSO. ISBN 978-0-11-752994-6

[10] Egan, J. (1998) ''Rethinking Construction: Report of the Construction Task Force'', London: HMSO

[11] Building Down Barriers: a guide to Construction Best Practice (2003) Clive Cain; Routledge ISBN 0415289635

[12] Types of value are taken from ''The Value handbook'' (2006) published by CABE and written by Dr Sebastian Macmillan of Eclipse Research Consultants ISBN 1 84633 0122 2

[13] Achieving Quality on Building Sites NEDO (1987) ISBN 0729208397. Also BRE current paper 7/81 Quality control on building Sites.

[14] ''Project information'' is defined as the information from designers necessary to tell the constructors what to build.

[15] Augmenting Human Intellect: A conceptual framework (1962). Stanford Research Institute for the (then) US Director of Information Sciences, Air Force Office of Scientific Research.

[16] BuildingSMART, formerly the International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI), is an international organisation which aims to improve the exchange of information between software applications used in the construction industry

[17] Link to view video (current April 2015):- [http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html]

[18] Building SMART has developed Industry Foundation Classes (IFCs) as a neutral and open specification for Building Information Models

[19] Government construction Strategy: (2011) Cabinet Office (link current April 2015 [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf] )

[20] Industrial strategy: government and industry in partnership. (2011) HM Government. [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/34710/12-1327-building-information-modelling.pdf Building Information Modelling]

[21] A PAS is a Publicly Available Specification – a type of document issued by BSI to serve a number of purposes; here to get an advance version of a ‘standard’ into the marketplace for use and development ahead of its permissible publication as a BS. In this case the document contains non-normative information so has to be in circulation as a PAS for around 18 months prior to being reissued as a BS. There are a number of documents under the “1192” nomenclature and it is likely that that once all of these are available for full BS publication they may be slightly reordered into a homogeneous set.

[22] [http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html]

[23] [http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf]

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]

BIM - it's about the Planet - Part 1

2015-05-12T11:58:34Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 11 BREEAM Communities Coverage.gif

2015-05-12T11:57:36Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 10 Digital Built Britain.gif

2015-05-12T11:57:07Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 9 The information delivery cycle at the heart of BIM.png

2015-05-12T11:56:08Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph.gif

2015-05-12T11:55:23Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements.gif

2015-05-12T11:54:49Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points.gif

2015-05-12T11:54:15Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 5 NURBS.gif

2015-05-12T11:53:40Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 4 BIM Maturity copyright obtained Bew Richards.gif

2015-05-12T11:51:33Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 3 the early CPI and coordinated documents.gif

2015-05-12T11:50:44Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 2 Digital infrastructures illustration of Facebook activity in 2010.jpg

2015-05-12T11:49:34Z

BRE Group:

BIM - it's about the Planet - Part 1

2015-05-12T11:35:06Z

BRE Group: Created page with " '''Author: Keith Snook''' This paper is based on historical activity and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments an..."

'''Author: Keith Snook''' 

This paper is based on historical activity and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that. 

In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely avaialbe to enrich lives socially and in enterpise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology.

BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

= '''Introduction – setting the scene''' =

The majority of papers on BIM - Building Information Modelling - tend to jump straight-in from a contemporary construction industry focus and concentrate on the technology angle. We risk however losing the wider context, including forgetting for example that the construction industry exists primarily to provide a built environment to facilitate other activities. In its potential for contributing to whole life data, BIM can help remind us of this. The construction industry in the UK has been the subject of many major reports in the last 100 years and we can also forget that these for the most part have each been a reaction to dissatisfaction of either specific aspects or generally a perceived poor performance. In order to put the application of the technology involved in BIM into a context this paper reviews ways in which the industry operates to deliver its products, picking up on themes from some of the many reviews, and links this to both the development of the environmental agenda and the emergence of the era of ubiquitous data[1]. 

= '''The environment''' =

There is no definitive date for the start of mass awareness of the environmental agenda; for some it is the early 1960s with pioneering publications, such as ‘Silent Spring’ by Rachel Carson in 1962 and early research findings starting to demonstrate trends, for others with the creation of early ‘action funds’ such as the Environmental Defence Fund in 1967 where a steep decline in the numbers of Osprey (Sea Eagle) caused alarm. For the mass photo-news and television oriented world a photograph taken on 24 December 1968 by Bill Anders an astronaut on the Apollo 8 space mission, might well serve the purpose. 

[[File:Fig 1 Earthrise.jpg]]Fig 1 “Earthrise” (Image available freely from NASA) 

With the barren lunar landscape in its foreground it symbolised the frailty of blue planet Earth and stimulated debate, action and awareness making it politically impossible for governments to continue to side-step the concerns previously expressed by engaged scientists and minority pressure groups. The path to where we are now has not been straight forward and agreement, particularly on action, seems to be harder to achieve notwithstanding increasing scientific consensus on imminent, predictable and irreversible effects of our influence. Of course even without the space mission(s) and the photograph we may well have arrived at the same place in our collective thinking but it provides a useful and emotive icon for the “start” particularly for those of us who remember its first publication. 

So what has the environmental movement to do with BIM? Concepts initially restricted to environmental conservation have long since been supplanted by more holistic understanding of sustainable development[2] with the term “environment” being expanded to cover all that surrounds us. More often than not the term “sustainability” is left to stand on its own as the descriptor of an ambition or target. To be more than just subjective ideals, aspects of this or any other definition have to be measurable and to do that requires data. For example a popular expression is to aspire to ‘zero carbon’. The science on how to measure let alone achieve this is complex, opaque and imprecise but at least it is a concept involving a quasi-numerical value to aim at. 

In the UK, the government hypothesis about BIM is direct on this. It refers specifically to carbon performance, is inclusive of economic value and is simply stated: 

''“Government as a client can derive significant improvements in cost, value and carbon performance through the use of open sharable asset information”[3] '' 

BIM is seen as a way of facilitating this as ''a''''sset information''''' is derived from data and some of that data will increasingly come from BIM, more will come from related data sets such as AIM (Asset Information Models) and others so far not ascribed an acronym but which will go on to be a part of ‘Big Data’[4]. 

= '''What is data? ''' =

As we shall see in the context of BIM and the implementation of the current UK government construction policies leading the way for the rest of the market, particular data can be quite specifically described and identified and indeed this is what most of the activity and effort has been about; but more generally what is it and how does BIM data fit into the wider ‘open data’ initiatives?

Data is a plural of datum which means fact. It is generally represented by digits and symbols and theoretically if kept to this simplicity it is universally interpretable. The term is also used to represent values in a qualified form such that increasing the level of qualification decreases the universality of interpretation. So in this common use of the term it enters a grey zone between its purest form and information; this grey zone becomes an important issue in compatibility of systems that operate with the data. Information is knowledge that makes sense and produces meaningful results from data. 

= '''Ubiquitous data''' =

That UK government statement does not say ‘BIM’ directly and that is where the notion of ubiquitous data enters the argument: Data is now everywhere and we do not know (yet) how best to use most of it creatively. Ubiquitous data includes social, mobile, big data, analytics, cloud, software as a service, process, and more recently, the [http://successfulworkplace.com/2012/11/05/microsoft-missed-out-on-the-internet-of-things-are-you-ready/ Internet of Things]. In forty years we’ve moved from an analogue society of paper and fixed telephone to a place where we are rapidly representing, our entire world as a digital landscape. Indeed the Earthrise photograph, or at least how it got to be taken, can be emblematic of this aspect too. The equivalent to the rooms of computing power at the time of that mission can now be installed in one device along with equivalent in digital storage of the paper drawings and specifications that would have been produced to create the Saturn launch vehicle used in the mission. Even more contemporarily it could be held in ‘the cloud’ and rapidly accessed on a smart-phone. 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image004.gif" alt="Description: [http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_c_wyuwcqp8Y/TQfeiflaCLI/AAAAAAAABW8/qjh7SRTIgjA/s1600/Facebook%2Bworld%2Bmap.jpg http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_c_wyuwcqp8Y/TQfeiflaCLI/AAAAAAAABW8/qjh7SRTIgjA/s1600/Facebook%2Bworld%2Bmap.jpg]" border="0" /> Fig 2 Digital infrastructures – illustration of Facebook activity in 2010 (published as creative commons by Mark Zuckerberg; founder and CEO of Facebook) 

Digital infrastructures have to support our ideas and interactions and be expansive so that through them we can make sense of everything physical, such as location, direction, acceleration, presence, contact, pressure, proximity, texture, temperature, gestures, odour, sound and nothing (absence of anything presently measurable). Sensors, applications, logs, and human interactions feed the process which in turn enables automation and human decision making. Analysis cycle times reduce and are more precise and so better inform decisions, help eliminate waste and error and enable enhanced interaction in a measured physical world. This is all with us now in popular applications that we have already begun to take for granted such as (often free) route planning and recording apps for our Smart Phones that relate personal data (age, weight, heart rate etc) to GPS data for example and produce information such a power output, calories burned and much more. Similar may not be overtly happening in construction but the fuel for this technology is data and BIM is data. Data about our built environment and whilst its present use, primarily in the service of construction design and process might hardly dent the above aspirations or comparisons, its adoption into full life cycles will make it become ever more significant and part of the ‘Big Data’ jigsaw puzzle. 

= '''Open Data''' =

The word ‘open’ indicates a significant move encouraging openness for the greater good in contrast to existing norms that emphasise ownership and advantage. Clearly commercial advantage and intellectual right continues to be important and respected but the movement is about freeing up all that does not genuinely need such protection. In the UK the Cabinet Office published the Open Data Strategy in June 2012 and hot on its heels the Open Data Institute (ODI) was founded in by Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Professor Nigel Shadbolt with £10m start-up funding (2012 – 2017) from the Technology Strategy Board. It is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, company limited by guarantee with the aim of catalysing the evolution of open data culture to create economic, environmental, and social value. It helps unlock supply, generates demand, creates and disseminates knowledge to address local and global issues through collaboration, incubation, nurturing and mentoring new ideas, and promoting innovation.

Internationally the G8 Nations Open Data Strategy and Charter[5] (2013) sets out a set of principles that will be the foundation for access to, and the release and re-use of, data made available by G8 governments. They are: 
*Open Data by Default 
*Quality and Quantity
*Useable by All 
*Releasing Data for Improved Governance
*Releasing Data for Innovation 

= '''IT in construction''' =

It is often said that the construction industry is behind other industries in its use of IT and at face value this is probably true though such statements are often supported by uncomfortable comparisons and lack of understanding of some of the issues. The complexity and transient nature of the relationships involved in the construction of the built environment is generally held as a reason (or excuse depending on viewpoint) for this backwardness. The industry has remained disjointed in its business structures and adversarial[#_edn6 [vi]] in the legal frameworks that relate the parts to the whole. In this context it is unsurprising that the various fragmented parts of the total process have apparently been reluctant to invest[7] in IT solutions that themselves have been for the most part aimed at providing particular business discrete or process discrete applications. For example even with BIM and its implication of collaboration the term “lonely BIM”, used to describe one discipline working in isolation with the technology, is not generally used as one might think in a pejorative way but used more to suggest that the protagonist is doing the best they can under the circumstances. However logical there has been very little imperative or obvious reward for anyone to beneficially own the unification of the discrete parts. Where it is addressed the business model is typically to cover the costs from deflecting the process risks and the methodology has been invariably through exercising quite punitive contractual relationships rather than creative management processes. Similarly and confronted with such a marketplace there have been few incentives for the IT industry to present solutions or for any individual parts of the construction industry to commission holistic solutions. Any efforts, and there have been some, have largely been left to small bands of enthusiasts, sometimes ‘borrowing’ time from understanding and sympathetic employers and a few academics. The passion behind essentially pro-bono efforts and the preciousness of academia can sometimes prove as divisive as the commercial pressures that their efforts set out to question. 

Many official reports on the industry identified the structural weaknesses as contributory to habitual ingrained and almost anticipated poor performance. Evidence for this occurred in the application of first construction industry Key Performances Indicators (KPIs) in the early 2000s. There was some pressure to have certain performance measures, particularly related to design issues, which could score more than 10/10 in order to highlight those cases where, for example, good design has genuinely created something that significantly exceeds demands and expectations. The mathematical logic of this approach was not unreasonably questioned but reluctantly there was agreement to include instead some additional questions in the data collection of the kind “did the performance exceed expectations”. This missed the point being pursued but was enlightening in another way. What subsequently happened was that this box was quite frequently selected but accompanying very ‘middling’ numerical scores indicating that expectations of the industry are institutionally low. 

What should be a turning point, albeit that there are still threats from ingrained cultures and custom is the confluence of: 
*IT in the form of BIM (and systems that surround it),
*IT in the rapid growth and use of digital media particularly in a social setting which is informing more formal processes and facilitating blisteringly rapid change,
*Emerging patronage for new processes in construction that challenge the status quo.

These now occupy the same space and the timetabled ramped approach to the technology aspects (see Fig 4) also helps provide a platform to address the industry cultural and custom issues by the provision of authoritative guidance. 

= '''UK construction industry operation''' =

The Coordinated Project Information codes were issued in 1987 and included a promotional video the opening scene of which is an animation of soldiers at the battle-front in the Crimea (~1850s). They are sending a vitally important message via several messengers to battalion HQ: ''“Send reinforcements – we are going to advance”''. Through various stages of distortion and mishearing that message arrives at HQ as ''“Send three and four pence – we are going to a dance”''.

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image006.jpg" border="0" />

Fig 3 the early CPI (large logo) and coordinated documents (small logo)

This simple, humorous often quoted and no doubt apocryphal scene captures one of the most significant issues that construction has failed to convincingly address. As an industry it has risen to all kinds of technical challenges, produced the most spectacular feats of engineering and breathtaking architecture and design; but it has failed to get its communications working effectively. There have been many efforts to both identify the difficulties and address them with perfectly reasonable, logical and sometimes pragmatic guidance. 

= '''Industry reviews - Lutyens to Egan – a selection''' =
*Not technically a review but a good line-in-the-sand starting point; renowned and respected architect Edwin Lutyens (1869 – 1944) in a frustrated response to a richly artistic but information poor trend in architectural drawings of the time said ''“ a working drawing is a letter to builder telling precisely what to build not a picture to charm….”''
*''“''The Bossom Report” – formally titled:'' Reaching for the Skies ''1934 identified fragmentation, inefficiency and adversarialism as the critical problems
*“The Simon Report” – formally titled:'' The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1944 in addressing the plans for post war rebuilding clearly equated lowest tender methods with lower standards and identified insufficient pre contract preparation and problems of indefinite and inequitable sub contracts.
*“The Banwell Report” – (also) formally titled: ''The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering works ''1964 recommended what we would now refer to as more collaborative processes using less adversarial relationships.
*“The Tavistock Report” - formally titled: ''Interdependence and Uncertainty: A study of the building ''''industry''''' 1966 noted the crippling effect of fragmentation (and actually rather summed it all up in its imaginative title).
*“The PIG Report” - formally titled: ''Project Information - its content and arrangement A report and proposals on the way forward'' 1978 By the Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination. This also called on research such as that reported in ''BRE Current Paper 18/73 “Working drawings in use” ''and ''BRE Current Paper 60/76 “Coordinating working drawings'' and went on to recommend (and fund) the creation of the CPI documents mentioned above and to set up the interdisciplinary body that maintains their contemporary versions and other publications and services to this day - CPIc[8]] (fig 3) 
*Latham 1994[9] and Egan 1998[10] again recognised the issues and, among other observations, both authors effectively said to the industry “why have you not adopted these (CPI) protocols?”. On neither occasion did the industry provide a reasoned response to the question. 

These are a selection of the better known reports and, in the light of what has transpired, one might only say ‘influential’ with some qualification.

= '''“Avanti” and “Building Down Barriers”''' =

In a programme funded by the then Department of Trade and Industry (DTI 2002) the CPI protocols were used in a mandated way on a series of projects. Otherwise they were all ‘ordinary’ building projects with a spread of technologies across what we would now call level 0 and 1 with a hint of level 2 on some as defined in fig 4 – the Bew - Richards BIM maturity graph. The projects were all fairly conventional, and used normal professional appointments, contractual arrangements, insurances, penalties etc. The programme was called ''Avanti – ICT enabled collaborative working'', and the only difference compared to other projects of the time was that they were each facilitated by individual mentors who knew the ins and outs of the relevant protocols including some that were in draft at that time such as documentation that was to evolve into BS1192 – 2007. 

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image008.jpg" border="0" /> Fig 4 BIM Maturity Graph in an early published form – Copyright obtained Bew Richards

Avanti reported in 2007 and on average showed savings in line with those expected in the current BIM programme of around 20 – 25%. Individual savings recorded for particular activities were even more startling: 
*Early commitment offering up to 80% saving on implementation cost on medium size project
*50-85% saving on effort spent receiving information and formatting for reuse
*60-80% saving on effort spent finding information and documents
*75–80% saving in effort to achieve design co-ordination
*50% saving on time spent to assess tenders and award sub-contracts
*50% saving on effort in sub-contractor design approval

A further initiative with a promising title “''] '' analysed the reasons for ‘initiative failures’ of the past and ironically also predicted its own failure in an early passage where it stated: ''“The reason why the numerous reports between 1929 and 1994 have failed to have any impact on the performance of the construction industry is because the industry continues to be blind to its failings. It is also unwilling to measure its performance, particularly the impact of fragmentation and adversarial attitudes.”'' 

''Building Down Barriers'' also had good patronage from the UK military as a very experienced client for a substantial built portfolio but even with its backing through demonstration projects and rather like Avanti, ''Building Down Barriers'' was seen by the rest of the industry primarily as a research experiment – exciting, fulfilling and a glimpse of a possible future for those involved but with the majority of them subsequently moving on to new projects procured and operated in a conventional way. Exposure to these projects slightly swelled the ranks of those individuals convinced by the methods and committed to improvements but they were still very much in the minority and mostly then with very little influence in the face of the complacency identified in that passage from the report. However with the emergence of the current government stimulated “BIM agenda” a gratifying number of those involved in or having knowledge of both ''Avanti'' and ''Building down Barriers'' and other research have emerged and, several years on, are operating in positions of influence. 

= '''Value and Quality''' =

Value and quality come and go out of fashion as valid subjects and there was much interest from government in the ‘Value, price mechanism’ post Latham and shortly after that the Design Quality Indicators (DQIs) were developed by the Construction Industry Council (CIC) and operate to this day albeit with limited take-up. They are implicit if not prominent in the current ‘BIM agenda’ and it is worth briefly considering them further as they are poorly understood terms. Most of the industry reports previously noted concentrated on issues either directly measurable in financial terms or resolvable to financial terms with very little manipulation. The current BIM initiative quite often uses the term ‘value’ rather than ‘cost’ which is an important, though it seems often not realised, distinction that also relates to ‘quality’ and other subjective concepts. Value and quality can be difficult to measure particularly in terms that are comparable. Richard Saxon in the 2005 report ''BE Valuable'' 

'''Value = What you get''' / '''What you give''' 

albeit that he notes that subjective and personal assessments for measuring the quantities of “what you get” and “what you give” must be used. Clearly, a result greater than unity is a positive (good) value outcome and less than unity is negative (bad). 

Value can be broken down to various types as identified by Dr Sebastian Macmillan in ''The value handbook''[12]''. Exchange value'' is easy to quantify monetarily for example (it is often referred to as ‘book value’ and will appear on asset registers) and there are systems such as BREEAM that address ''environmental value'' in quantifiable terms. ''Image value'' can generally be assessed in context by those to whom it is important and for some endeavours ''use value'' might conform to a fairly precise algorithm, eg factory efficiency, but ''social value'' and ''cultural value'' may be difficult to reduce to simple monetary terms. 

Quality is technically fairly easy to define (there is a British Standard / ISO definition) and measure but the difficulty comes more from misuse as the term is often used loosely for example to describe gratuitous opulence rather than effectiveness or fitness for purpose or even beauty. Government funded research at BRE contemporary with that for the CPI codes focused on a long term objective and observational study of the achievement of quality on UK construction sites and produced interesting results that did not support common perception. The emphasis on objective research is important in this. Research based on typical survey or structured interview techniques as would be more likely now would have probably produced different results for the same reasons as the failure to adopt better working practices noted in the ''Building Down Barriers''. The construction industry has not embraced attempts at self-contemplation or measurement and has taken precious little notice of any applied to it by third parties, including BRE even when it was a government funded research laboratory. Therefore the industry self-perception, which is what inquisitorial rather than observational techniques tend to expose, is likely to provide a biased picture. The BRE research[13] contradicted commonly cited industry rhetoric which often displayed almost feudal attitudes in placing responsibility for failures with trades people or other operatives as a default. The research, which was not distracted by industry opinions or prejudices, showed that management and professional failures to do with information are responsible for far more compromises of the quality of the product than those directly caused by site works or operatives. On the issue of skill for example it found that there was abundant skill in those properly trained for the job albeit at times there were simply not enough skilled people to match workloads. By far the single largest culprit for failures of quality however was ''missing or inadequate project information''[#_edn14 [xiv]]''.'' Which again directs us to consider BIM and particularly the UK government led initiative which emanates from the Government Construction Strategy. 

= '''The technology''' =

What we now know as BIM may not go quite as far back as the Lutyens quote but certainly goes back to the 1960s – the era of “Banwell” and “Tavistock”. Put very simplistically, and perhaps even patronisingly, the development of computing has in part been a story of a universal solution with huge potential looking for problems to address. Applications in manufacturing are familiar and there were enlightened thinkers from both computing and construction who had realised that the built environment would also be a very likely place. Indeed not just the “built environment” but environment more generally as developments in mapping (Geographic Information Systems – GIS) have run in parallel with those for construction. The first mass impact of computing was to business generally where computers were enthusiastically introduced to automate tedious tasks. This put computers inside organisations and increased their familiarity. It was also the start of the idea of integrated business systems with forward thinkers envisaging a situation where data would only emerge for uses that require human intervention and not for it to re-emerge for such things as transfer between operations if no human intervention was necessary. This is an ideal we are still pursuing, its original conception having been severely hampered by the development of competing proprietary systems for the most part addressing solitary purposes and functions and parts of complex processes rather than the whole. This would also become an issue with CAD and BIM systems.

For construction, creating detailed technical drawings (as distinct from design drawings) was identified as one of those “tedious tasks” and application of computing to this became CAD in the form Computer Aided Drafting. The same acronym is used for Computer Aided Design with many confusingly using the two synonymously. As early as 1962 Douglas C. Englebart makes suggestions of the shift from just Drafting to Design in his paper ''Augmenting Human Intellect''[#_edn15 [xv]]. Perhaps being an engineer rather than an architect himself his cited ‘architectural design’ example, focuses on technical rather than aesthetic design aspects.

''“The architect next begins to enter a series of specifications and data–a six-inch slab floor, twelve-inch concrete walls eight feet high within the excavation, and so on. When he has finished, the revised scene appears on the screen. A structure is taking shape. He examines it, adjusts it. These lists grow into an ever more-detailed, interlinked structure, which represents the maturing thought behind the actual design.”'' 

It does however introduce concepts of what we now know as parametric object based design involving a relational database; or (now) BIM for short. 

In construction and with the move from research into viable commercial systems during the 1970s and 80s much of the development activity became directed towards further reducing the tedium and cost of drafting and, for the more forward thinking, creating parametrically accurate objects linked to other relevant data. Virtually all development however had the objective of producing reliable drawings, and schedules, to fit into the normal contractual, legal and business processes of construction whether in the UK, US or Europe (or elsewhere – Finland for example has always been at the forefront of the subject). With much of it having been based in research and at that time there being little imperative for considering open or interoperable systems, improvements continued in the computing aspects and software advanced (within the scope of also rapidly improving hardware) but the end game was still servicing the industry business norms and to a limited extent advancements in visualisations and graphical rendering. Whilst the earlier list of reports and the sometimes bleak messages within them about these norms is confined to the UK, most other regions had broadly similar issues with interdisciplinary relationships and there was little reference to using information technology to address these issues. Perhaps there should have been more in that the sponsoring body for the 1978 UK “PIG” report was the “Project Information Group (PIG) of the Department of the Environment NCC Standing Committee on Computing & Data Co-ordination”, but the report focused on the observed problems, with frequent references to BRE research, and bizarrely bearing in mind the scope implied in its title, did not mention computer applications. 

Another aspect, particularly in respect of commercial development in the early years was the human/computer interface and there was a period when the software and processing power/potential was running well ahead of this aspect as in the laboratory interface issues are generally not such an imperative. A watershed occurred between 1980 and 1985 in the commercial application of interface systems, led by the mouse, that we are familiar with now. 

In the mid to late 1980s there was a discernible split in development effort. The first was towards efficiencies in the construction process which is where the first references to time being the 4th dimension in what was to become BIM were made. The other was continued development of design aspects and simulations. 

= '''Becoming virtual''' =

In 1982 in Budapest, Hungary, work started on what is generally reckoned to be the first BIM software. Current versions of this software are in use today, they are favoured by Mac users and used mainly on small to medium sized construction projects to which it is particularly well suited. Inspired to make something to cater for more complex projects the same group developed software which following purchase by a much larger software company in 2000 is now one of the most ubiquitous Architectural BIM authoring tools with versions for other disciplines also in the portfolio. 

Prior to this acquisition, which changed the company’s commercial landscape by adding a highly functional proprietary tool to their portfolio, the company had teamed up with the International Alliance for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability Interoperability] (IAI – later to become BuildingSmart[16]), to produce a particularly altruistic film called “The End of Babel” [17]. The film promotes open systems and particularly the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC)[18] that AIA had just started to develop. It uses the famous story of the building of Babel as an analogy with the lack of system interoperability and, albeit an American production, was presented a by UK television household name of the day on technology, James Burke. From his script: 

''"The [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel Tower of Babel], one of the biggest construction projects undertaken. Designed to reach the heavens. But the engineers couldn't finish the job. Halfway through everybody working on the job was stricken with inability to understand what the other fellow was saying. They were all still talking......but they weren't communicating. That incident was supposed to have taken place in around 5,000 BC. And we've been trying to understand each other ever since''." 

That vision in the film remains an objective of the current BIM initiative in the UK and probably also elsewhere as whist it focuses on the technology and the ambition for IFCs, the underlying story is about total collaboration and cooperation in order to achieve the goal.

Another approach to design collaboration is software which is solely designed to coordinate across varying file formats and include other features such as data collection, construction simulation and clash detection.

Simulation programs, many aimed at environmental issues, have been developed that work with imported models and recently BIM authoring tools have provided inbuilt simulation capability also. More recently still the increase in hand held devices has been recognised and the niche of rapid conceptualisation using such devices is being addressed by software providers including those from outside the established construction software providers and including the power houses behind global data searching.

The last significant player (for now) in the technology support is collaboration software. The message is finally being accepted at the leading edge that the multitudes of designers, consultants, project managers, construction contractors and sub-contractors brought together in a temporary organisation for the term of a project need to be able to communicate in controlled and reliable manner with much of that communication being at data level. Only then can they start to operate effectively and efficiently as a team. The leading providers of collaboration software have also recognised the basic project stages such as design and contract preparation, construction and contract completion and operate and maintain; and are engaged in making their tools applicable throughout it. Indeed in the UK the government is funding a master ‘digital Plan of Work’ in order that all sectors can adopt a common structure. The gulf between the information involved in the construction and operation of a facility has been identified for some time and much effort is now becoming concentrated on that.

= '''Creative tension''' =

Related to the introduction of the technology there is a tension within the education of creative designers such as architects. The argument suggests that creativity could suffer in the face of expediency and this is probably best explained by using a simple example. BIM platforms typically represent walls, for example, as objects with layers and these layers are defined in terms of the depth and height and are then extruded along the length of a line. The program then has the ability to calculate dimensional properties such as the volume of material contained within the wall assembly and to create wall sections and details easily. However by definition this type of workflow is based on the existing buildings, common industry standards and conventional technology and solutions and therefore a project which is produced in BIM authoring software which emphasizes these methods is likely to reinforce existing paradigms rather than contribute to developing new ones that advance the art and science. This is, or certainly the fear of it is, further exacerbated by the proliferation of BIM Libraries which, rather like standard details in line-drawn form from previous generations, are viewed with some suspicion. 

These perceived limitations of parametric flexibility and geometry sculpting has led to the development of systems supporting non uniform rational basic splines (NURBS). These platforms have provided the power to iterate and transform for complex and provocative architectural forms and are favoured by those wishing to explore forms involving organic shapes and for projects such as those related to infrastructure where, for example, natural landform shapes inform or become a part of the design. NURBS is now increasingly incorporated into more generally available in software.

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image011.jpg" alt="Description: [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/NURBS_surface.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/NURBS_surface.png]" border="0" />

Fig 5. NURBS surface defined by control points over a two-dimensional parameter field. (Creative commons: Wikimedia.org)

= '''BIM and the UK Government Construction Strategy [19]''' =

Whilst private sector client bodies, design consultants, construction contractors and others have variously seen advantages of BIM and implemented aspects of BIM on projects it is the Government Construction Strategy (2011) that is the authoritative origin for the government led initiative that is now the primary focus for the application of BIM in the UK. The key sentence within the strategy for this is: 

''“2.32 Government will require fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic) as a minimum by 2016''.” 

This and the detail surrounding it, not least a fully detailed “BIM strategy”[20], has taken much of the attention and an important feature is the inclusion of a premise that the government as a client for construction needs to improve and indeed become exemplary. For government this uniquely means committing to and publishing a rolling programme of procurement intentions. This is an important aspiration for an industry that is reluctant to make significant capital investment, is one of the most sensitive to economic cycles and is wary of an historic trend of being used as a fiscal regulator by successive governments. More generally and an aspect that has more potential to be replicated in the private sector is creating defined data expectations at predetermined points within individual projects (fig 6) 

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image013.jpg" border="0" />

Fig 6 Information exchanges and client delivery points set against generic work stages (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

The provision of explicit individual project data provides for a greater accuracy in evaluating that work in terms of quality, time and cost. It is presumed, and at present can only be hoped, that this client facing subtlety of the whole initiative is not lost when translated for private procurement when the distinctions between capital and operational budgets or even simply short and longer term benefits generally are in apparent commercial conflict brought about by silo thinking. Government has also identified a number of projects on which to test the emerging procedures being developed to accommodate both new working practices and apply methods including BIM software. Fig 7 shows an example of a chart from one of these early projects illustrating the high level data requirements set against the project work stages (running along the top). The information or data sets that respond to the data requirements will then generate definite client actions and decisions that allow the project to progress without the lack of certainty typical in much construction procurement. 

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image015.jpg" border="0" /> 

Fig 7 Project information strategy and data requirements. (from Govt. BIM Task force web site) 

Describing the current incarnation of BIM in the UK invariably and logically starts with the “Bew/Richards maturity graph”. This has been used to guide and map the production of critical industry documentation on the subject as a part of a “roadmap” to the standards and other document development to support the implementation of BIM (fig 8). In 2014 the definitive items of such guidance for ‘level 2’ were determined. Each of these documents has further references to others necessary to complete the story. 

They are: 
*PAS,1192-2 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling [21] 
*PAS 1192-3, [http://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/Details/52072 Specification for information management for the operational phase of construction projects using building information modelling] 
*BS 1192-4, UK Implementation of COBie 
*CIC BIM protocol, 
*Government Soft Landings, 
*Classification - to be completed in 2015 
*Digital Plan of Works - to be completed in 2015 

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image017.jpg" border="0" />

Fig 8 The BIM Maturity Graph – a part of the UK roadmap for BIM. (The Roadmap from Govt. BIM Task force web site is a live document updated from time to time to reflect progress and necessary changes.) 

With the clarification of this list it is possible to more positively define what ‘level 2’ BIM is and to create focused education and training to establish and test core competencies. Courses both in formative education and particularly in re-educating practitioners through CPD and other training is now taking shape. 

The most significant of the documents listed is PAS1192 – 2 which in large part is focused on the Information delivery cycle at fig 9. The information delivery cycle is explained in detail below and selected definitions from the Standard are also included to aid its understanding. It shows the cycle laid-out against a process plan. This plan will eventually be set out, when work is complete (mid 2015), to be the digital Plan of Work. 

An important point, probably the most important point about the development of the UK BIM maturity levels is that whilst the line between level 2 and level 3 can be, and is, described in technical terms and in terms of the information handling processes and protocols it is primarily determined by the ability to operate within normal contractual, legal and other broadly familiar arrangements up to the line. What this means is that no wholesale rewriting of construction contracts is necessary although it does encourage a change of approach and certain modification as provided for in the CIC BIM Protocol which also introduces a new task of information management which is covered in a referred document called the Outline Scope of Services for the Role of Information Management. The Protocol is a contractual document that when introduced takes precedence over existing agreements (so a fairly significant amendment to standard forms) and places an obligation on parties to provide distinct elements of their services at predetermined stages in a project. The application of the Protocol is covered in guidance also prepared by the CIC. This guidance also covers aspects of professional indemnity insurance - often cited as a stumbling block for collaborative methods. 

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image019.jpg" border="0" /> 

Fig 9 The information delivery cycle that is at the heart of PAS 1192-2. (Copyright obtained from Mervyn Richards)

----

'''Notes for fig 9''' 

The information delivery cycle has two points of entry. For new build projects, at the “Need” box (top right in the fig), for projects that are part of a larger portfolio or estate, or for work on existing buildings and structures, it is at the right-hand arrow “Assessment” which draws on the information in the Asset Information Model (AIM). Here PAS1192-2, which deals with the Capital expenditure phase, references PAS1192-3, which deals with the Operational expenditure phase. These points of entry are also referenced in the Common Data Environment – CDE (central zone in the fig). The information delivery cycle (blue arrows) shows the generic process of identifying a project need, procuring and awarding a contract, mobilizing a supplier and generating production information and asset information relevant to the need. This cycle is followed for every aspect of a project, including the refinement of design information through the seven project stages shown (green). Work is on-going defining these as an accepted industry standard but well known systems such as the RIBA Plan of Work (2013) can be used.

The pale green wedge represents the CDE that collects information through the lifecycle for management, dissemination, exchange and retrieval processes.

Red circles indicate information exchanges between the project team and the employer in answer to the Plain Language questions defined in the employer’s information requirements (EIR). Information exchanges between project team members are indicated by small green circles. '''Selected definitions from PAS1192-2asset information model (AIM) ''' maintained information model used to manage, maintain and operate the asset.
*'''common data environment (CDE)''' single source of information for any given project, used to collect, manage and disseminate all relevant approved project documents for multi-disciplinary teams in a managed process
*'''employer’s information requirements (EIR)''' pre-tender document setting out the information to be delivered, and the standards and processes to be adopted by the supplier as part of the project delivery process
*'''information exchange ''' structured collection of information at one of a number of pre-defined stages of a project with defined format and fidelity
*'''master information delivery plan (MIDP) ''' primary plan for when project information is to be prepared, by whom and using what protocols and procedures, incorporating all relevant task information delivery plans
*'''project implementation plan (PIP)''' statement relating to the suppliers’ IT and human resources capability to deliver the EIR
*'''project information model (PIM) ''' information model developed during the design and construction phase of a project

= '''Keeping up to date''' =

Any published paper on the current development of BIM and particularly developments within the UK government strategy under the leadership of the BIM Task Group will inevitably quickly become out of date with the latest information published on the task group website [http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/ http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/] . Included among a wealth of useful information and resources on the site are reports from the case study projects under the title ‘Lessons Learned’ and these are regularly updated.

= '''Bringing it all together''' =

Harnessing IT and computing power in the name of the built environment will of course not stop here, indeed the developments will continue at rapid rate but there is clearly a view that in terms of BIM and those issues that surround it, that a watershed has been reached. The completeness, availability, accessibility and robustness of both authoritative guidance, much in the form of Standards, and commercially available tools such as but not restricted to BIM authoring software, is adequate to dispel objections from the industry to adopt more reliable ways of working, particularly when a strong client effectively mandates that way. This is effectively what the UK government announced in 2011 to take effect by 2016 and whilst the UK is not alone in its ambitions it is the most emphatic and certainly has made the most powerfully managed and supported statement of this kind. The general view is that because of this approach the UK has taken the international lead “in BIM” with UK originated Standards forming the basis of International Standards to be published by ISO (International Standards Organisation). This also marks the starting point for most papers about BIM.

They also very often seek a definition for what ‘BIM’ is, something that this paper has steered clear of preferring to chart the rocky path to where we are now and leave the reader to contemplate the need for a definition. Thankfully it is generally now accepted that sales of software with BIM in or implied in its title is not a valid indication and neither is some kind of measure of 3D graphical representations, renderings or animations; much as they have their place. Almost all of the leaders in the field in the UK and many elsewhere have generally given up in trying to define BIM briefly and there is now a broad understanding that the shorthand use of the term describes something that it is about much more than software and 3D imagery. They see that it is primarily about dealing with information in all its forms accepting that much of this is exchanged as data that only needs to emerge from the various systems (inevitably utilising up to the minute IT) at operational points requiring human intervention. A number of single paragraph definitions do exist and at appendix 1 that offered in 2010 by CPIc is included as it is derived from a short study of a collection of other definitions and does not contradict the above understanding. However and as we have seen, in the UK various levels have been created and described in terms of evolving ‘maturity’ (fig 8) and the official ‘definition of the 2016 target “level 2” is set by a number of Standards and protocols listed previously. Einstein said that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” In respect of a definition of ‘BIM’ this seems to be a wise statement.

= '''Summary''' =

So what we have is:
*A realisation and acceptance that the way we are using the planet is not sustainable and that buildings and infrastructure must play their part in preserving valuable and exhaustible resources.
*A latent realisation that relatively new found powers of mass data collection, exchange and analysis can help determine where activity and measures might be best focused in order to most effectively address sustainability issues.
*An industry, and that is the extended industry including suppliers, manufacturers and those responsible for managing facilities, that has historically failed to perform optimally due primarily to its fragmentation and management issues and within those particularly issues of information management. Information is made up of data.
*A market that has accepted the poor performance the industry as the norm and has exacerbated and promoted that poor performance through its procurement and financing processes.
*Products from the industry that are sometimes stunning in their contribution to the landscape and exemplary in terms of design and function but which, across the entire range, are habitually an opaque mystery to those that use operate and maintain them.
*A catalogue of proposals from authoritative bodies (many external to the industry) that are thematically similar enough as to not be competing, contradictory or confusing that thoroughly address many of the issues but which have been largely ignored by both the industry and the market as they question customs, norms and historic vested interests.
*A set of technologies – broadly labelled ‘BIM’ – that both demand the application of some of the previously ignored proposals to operate optimally and helpfully make it easier for that to occur.
*Driven by social use as much as scientific or business use, a blisteringly rapid movement towards a world of pervasive data. Indeed the speed and intensity of this is such that at times distinctions between social, scientific and business become blurred.
*In the UK particularly but with similar elsewhere also; a client body large enough to demand a phase-change in procurement parameters and committed enough to invest in formal guidance, systems and protocols to a published timetable.
*Encouragement that, led by early stages of this phase-change, the UK is reckoned to have taken the lead in meaningful BIM implementation[22].

= '''The future - “Level 3?”''' =

Relating back to the levels of the maturity diagram (fig 8), what about level 3?

A part of the success of the UK initiative is concentrating minds on the presently doable and more importantly useful in order to make progress in manageable step changes. Because of this it has been difficult to get any firm information on level 3 and what it will look like. However, on 26 February 2015 the launch of Digital Built Britain, the UK Level 3 Building Information Modelling program was announced by Rt Hon Dr Vince Cable. The press release said: “The work will build a digital economy for the construction industry in support of dramatically improving delivery, operations and services provided to citizens. The programme will build on the standards and savings delivered by the BIM level 2 initiative which has been central to the £840M savings achieved on central public spend in 2013/14.” A new website has been established at [http://digital-built-britain.com/ http://digital-built-britain.com/].

Many in the industry had filled-in the level 3 void using their own imaginations as to what it might be and some even claim to be already ‘doing it’. However, in the government task force and among experts close to it there has been a feeling that anyone saying that they are doing ‘level 3’ is misguided. The two primary arguments for this are. Requirements for level 3 have not been formally defined but we now know the proposed mechanism for doing this. Secondly, and more pragmatically the (standard) legal relationships and process protocols do not exist and this is high on the agenda for then new organisation. Heretofore the closest to the thumbnail sketch on the maturity diagram (fig 8) of what level 3 might be like is probably examples where the entire process from land holding and developing through design and construction and including asset management rest within one singe company or family of companies in a kind of benign dictatorship. What this facilitates is a very prescriptive approach to the ownership and use of technology so technical aspects of coordination might be resolved but, by definition, it is not an open system. More importantly, however, it is not representative of potential varied business relationships that ‘level 3’ will eventually have to service. Hopefully without falling into the trap of inventing a definition ahead of the official word on it from Digital Built Britain ; ‘level 3’ will have to service any forms of business relationships and allow them to contract with each other in a way that will create, retain and preserve legal security for the individual parties whilst allowing (encouraging even) total cooperation and collaboration.

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image021.gif" alt="Home" border="0" />

Fig 10 The logo to look out for on ‘level 3’ (and beyond). (from Govt. BIM Task force web site)

Some early work on level 3 is looking beyond (level 4?) in order to set the scene for Big Data engagement. The BIM agenda has methodically considered the cycle of development transition from Capital Expenditure (CAP EX) to Operational Expenditure (OPEX) (Fig 9). Connecting the data that drives this process into the immediate environment and then beyond that brings forward the concept of Total Expenditure (TOT EX) which is inclusive of many other issues such as social, economic and sustainability at a community level as is included within BREEAM and in particular the BREEAM Communities scheme [23] which has been developed to find sustainable ways of addressing 21st century challenges like urbanisation and climate change. It covers economic, social and environmental sustainability – assessing issues like housing provision, transport networks, community facilities, and economic impact. It makes sure that sustainability is considered at the very early stages of design where site-wide solutions can have a big impact. BREEAM Communities and indeed the family of BREEAM schemes, can be both provider and user of data in the quest for continual improvement through feedback, assimilation and application loops.

 

<img src="file:///C:\Users\NichollA\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image023.jpg" border="0" />

Fig 11. BREEAM Communities coverage which can provide a ready basis for the concept of ‘Tot Ex’

= '''Conclusion''' =

This paper is based on historical and signposts current activity in the UK but does, where appropriate make reference to developments and parallells elsewhere. It starts with and acknowleges the realisation that we must do something about the depletion of our planet’s resources and finishes with a suggestion that by joining the appropriate data together we stand a better chance of doing that. In terms of the construction industry it moves from a quote from a leading architect made around 90 years ago through to a world where we are enveloped in data and undergoing an attitude change that proposes that as much data as possible should be freely avaialbe to enrich lives socially and in enterpise collaboratively. The role of the built environment and particularly the construction industry that produces it is the main focus of the paper, tracing that industry’s relative failings in communications, teamwork and adoption of technology. BIM is the current push and there are high expectations for its capacity to enable the changes necessary and the UK is taking this very seriously, so much so in fact that the eyes of the world are now turned towards it and by considered measures it is now generally considered to be leading with it being highly likely that Standards and guidance prepared for the UK market will become internationalised. It will be up to the industry to capitlaise on this situation.

This paper started with an iconic photograph from the 1960s so it might be fitting to end with the final passage from a poem that, albeit written some time before and was never quite so iconic, became popular with the new ‘environmentalists ‘ of that era.

From “The Beaks of Eagles” by Robinson Jeffers 1887 -1962

''It is good for man '' ''To try all changes, progress and corruption, powers, peace and anguish, ''

''not to go down the dinosaur's way '' ''Until all his capacities have been explored: ''

''and it is good for him '' ''To know that his needs and nature are no more changed in fact in ten thousand years than the beaks of eagles.''

 

= CPIc definition for BIM =

'''Building Information Modelling is digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility creating a shared knowledge resource for information about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle, from earliest conception to demolition.'''

From paper “Drawing is Dead – long live modelling”

[http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/ http://www.cpic.org.uk/publications/drawing-is-dead/]

= References =

[1] "From the dawn of civilization to 2003, five exabytes (1018) of data were created. The same amount was created in the last two days." Google CEO Eric Schmidt speaking in the keynote presentation at the Guardian's Activate summit 2010, which addressed "society, humanity, technology and the Web"

[2] Brundtland is probably the most widely accepted formal definition. The first part of this is: ''"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”''

[3] Main hypothesis of A Report for the Government Construction Client Group – BIM working strategy Client Group 2011

[4] Big Data is generally reckoned to be collections of data beyond current data handling capability and as such is constantly advancing. Gartner(US IT research and advisory organisation) defines it as: “Big data is high volume, high velocity, and/or high variety information assets that require new forms of processing to enable enhanced decision making, insight discovery and process optimization”

[5][https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/207772/Open_Data_Charter.pdf]

[6] This term is the widely used to mean ‘confrontational and antagonistic’ implying something negative; and is used in this manner in this paper. However, technically the UK legal system is classified as ‘adversarial’ (in contrast to the inquisitorial system such as Napoleonic Law in much of Europe) so in the pure contextual definition of the word it does not confer anything negative.

[7] A survey of 60,000 UK IT budget holders undertaken by the Journal ‘Computer Weekly’ stated: “Large construction firms spend an average of £10,285 per desktop each year on IT - more than 20% above the UK-wide business average of £8,455. This differential is even more marked in small and medium sized construction firms, where the average spend is £5,307 per desktop against an SME industry average of £3,132.”

[8] CPIc is the Construction Project Information Committee, responsible for providing best practice guidance on the content, form and preparation of construction production information (CPI), and making sure this best practice is disseminated throughout the UK construction industry. It comprises representation from: RIBA, RICS, CC, ICE, CIAT, CIBSE, CIOB

[9] Latham, M. (1994), ''Constructing the Team'', London: HMSO. ISBN 978-0-11-752994-6

[10] Egan, J. (1998) ''Rethinking Construction: Report of the Construction Task Force'', London: HMSO

[11] Building Down Barriers: a guide to Construction Best Practice (2003) Clive Cain; Routledge ISBN 0415289635

[12] Types of value are taken from ''The Value handbook'' (2006) published by CABE and written by Dr Sebastian Macmillan of Eclipse Research Consultants ISBN 1 84633 0122 2

[13] Achieving Quality on Building Sites NEDO (1987) ISBN 0729208397. Also BRE current paper 7/81 Quality control on building Sites.

[14] ''Project information'' is defined as the information from designers necessary to tell the constructors what to build.

[15] Augmenting Human Intellect: A conceptual framework (1962). Stanford Research Institute for the (then) US Director of Information Sciences, Air Force Office of Scientific Research.

[16] BuildingSMART, formerly the International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI), is an international organisation which aims to improve the exchange of information between software applications used in the construction industry

[17] Link to view video (current April 2015):- [http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/end-of-babel-ifc-promotional-video.html]

[18] Building SMART has developed Industry Foundation Classes (IFCs) as a neutral and open specification for Building Information Models

[19] Government construction Strategy: (2011) Cabinet Office (link current April 2015 [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61152/Government-Construction-Strategy_0.pdf] )

[20] Industrial strategy: government and industry in partnership. (2011) HM Government. [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/34710/12-1327-building-information-modelling.pdf Building Information Modelling]

[21] A PAS is a Publicly Available Specification – a type of document issued by BSI to serve a number of purposes; here to get an advance version of a ‘standard’ into the marketplace for use and development ahead of its permissible publication as a BS. In this case the document contains non-normative information so has to be in circulation as a PAS for around 18 months prior to being reissued as a BS. There are a number of documents under the “1192” nomenclature and it is likely that that once all of these are available for full BS publication they may be slightly reordered into a homogeneous set.

[22] [http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html http://www.saxoncbe.com/a-darwinian-moment.html]

[23] [http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20Communities/Introduction_to_BREEAM_Communities.pdf]

[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]]

File:Fig 2 Digital infrastructures illustration of Facebook activity in 2010.gif

2015-05-12T11:13:11Z

BRE Group:

File:Fig 1 Earthrise.jpg

2015-05-12T11:11:43Z

BRE Group: Fig 1 “Earthrise” (Image available freely from NASA)

Fig 1 “Earthrise” (Image available freely from NASA)

File:Fig 1 Earthrise.gif

2015-05-12T11:08:04Z

BRE Group: Fig 1 "Earthrise" (image available freely from NASA)

Fig 1 "Earthrise" (image available freely from NASA)

Visual alarm devices - their effectiveness in warning of fire

2015-04-01T11:29:55Z

BRE Group:

Research by BRE looked at the effectivenewss of visual alarm devices in warning building occupants of fire. The research compared the responses of a group of participants to flashing Xenon and LED devices of varying pulse durations. One Xenon device, three cool white LED devices (of 40, 20 and 10 millisecond (ms) pulse durations) and two warm white LED devices (of 40 and 20ms pulse durations) were used.

The flashing signals were presented individually to 96 participants who were seated in front of a screen and occupied in a written task. The tests were performed in high and low ambient light level conditions. The devices were flashed one at a time, and from a distance of 19m were gradually brought closer to the screen until the subjects responded. The response data was processed to identify the effective illumination levels required to alert people to the flashing signals from the six devices.

Analysis of this data revealed that as the pulse durations of LED devices shorten the attention drawing effectiveness increases. It also demonstrated no significant difference in responses between warm white LED devices and cool white LED devices. The Xenon and 10ms cool white LED device had similar responses; however, a cool white LED device with a pulse duration of 5ms may out-perform a Xenon device.

Find out more and see the full project report on the [http://www.bre.co.uk/filelibrary/Briefing%20papers/VAD-Briefing-Paper.pdf BRE Group website].

Visual alarm devices - their effectiveness in warning of fire

2015-04-01T11:27:55Z

BRE Group: Created page with " Research by BRE compared the responses of a group of participants to flashing Xenon and LED devices of varying pulse durations. One Xenon device, three cool white LED devices (o..."

Research by BRE compared the responses of a group of participants to flashing Xenon and LED devices of varying pulse durations. One Xenon device, three cool white LED devices (of 40, 20 and 10 millisecond (ms) pulse durations) and two warm white LED devices (of 40 and 20ms pulse durations) were used.

The flashing signals were presented individually to 96 participants who were seated in front of a screen and occupied in a written task. The tests were performed in high and low ambient light level conditions. The devices were flashed one at a time, and from a distance of 19m were gradually brought closer to the screen until the subjects responded. The response data was processed to identify the effective illumination levels required to alert people to the flashing signals from the six devices.

Analysis of this data revealed that as the pulse durations of LED devices shorten the attention drawing effectiveness increases. It also demonstrated no significant difference in responses between warm white LED devices and cool white LED devices. The Xenon and 10ms cool white LED device had similar responses; however, a cool white LED device with a pulse duration of 5ms may out-perform a Xenon device.

Find out more and see the full project report on the [http://www.bre.co.uk/filelibrary/Briefing%20papers/VAD-Briefing-Paper.pdf BRE Group website].

The cost of poor housing to the NHS

2015-03-30T07:47:51Z

BRE Group: Created page with " In March 2015 BRE published "The cost of poor housing to the NHS - Briefing Paper" The paper, funded by the BRE Trust, looks at how poor quality housing impacts on health. It up..."

In March 2015 BRE published "The cost of poor housing to the NHS - Briefing Paper" The paper, funded by the BRE Trust, looks at how poor quality housing impacts on health. It updates a previous BRE project The Real Cost of Poor Housing with new models and calculations using 2011 English Housing Survey and 2011 indicative NHS treatment costs. It also widens the definition from ‘poor housing’ to include all ‘sub-standard’ housing.

The paper is available from: [http://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=3611 http://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=3611]

[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]

Bottom-up approach to address the challenges of low-carbon eco-cites

2015-01-23T10:59:46Z

BRE Group: Created page with " '''by Cary Buchanan and Ffion Batcup – BRE Global ''' As we learn more about good urban design practices, we can use this knowledge to uncouple economic growth in cities with..."

'''by Cary Buchanan and Ffion Batcup – BRE Global '''

As we learn more about good urban design practices, we can use this knowledge to uncouple economic growth in cities with the negative ecological and social impacts often associated with urbanisation. The challenges associated with urbanisation at the city scale are substantial. Experience worldwide has shown, cities can be both resilient to change, as well as extremely fragile. It is critical that we reflect, to learn from both international best practise and market failures, to ensure that there is a drive towards more sustainable communities that are vibrant, economically successful and healthy places to live. Nowhere is this likely to be as relevant, than in China, a country that is predicted to have the largest urban population in the world by 2050, some 1 billion people (UN DESA, 2012). China already has some of the largest cities in the world including Shanghai and Beijing.

This article will consider some of the components that can help to create sustainable communities and their applicability at the city scale, through tracing the evolution of the Low Carbon Eco-Cities initiative, its current drivers and some of the challenges that need to be addressed in order to facilitate the progression of this initiative. The BREEAM Communities framework will be discussed, along with its potential to fulfil the aspirations of Eco-Cities.

= '''The changing landscape of cites''' =

The challenges associated with urbanisation including; environmental degradation, insufficient infrastructure, overcrowding, social inequalities and urban sprawl are of increasing concern. However we can learn from historical periods of urbanisation, particularly in Europe which offer examples of good planning and innovative housing design. Letchworth, England offers a good example as it was already demonstrating a positive vision of urban development back in 1903; providing enhanced employment opportunities, links with the natural ecology in the surrounding countryside, whilst integrating principles of sustainable urban design.

However, today there are many additional challenges due to the increased rate and scale of urbanisation. Not only are more people than ever living in cities, but the United Nations has predicted that this global trend will continue, with urban areas globally “expected to absorb all the population growth expected over the next four decades” (UN DESA). This trend has led to the emergence of “Megacities” (cities with over 10 million inhabitants), the number of which is increasing and it is predicted that the number of people residing in them will double by 2025 (UN DESA, 2012). Shanghai provides a good example of the challenges associated with megacities, such as smog, congestion and issues surrounding water quality. These challenges are well recognised, with the Municipality of Shanghai embarking on the Shanghai environment project in the nineties. Progress is being made and the city is now recognised for the provision of high quality park space, improving the urban environment. A handful of countries are driving this trend, including China and India, who together account for approximately one third of the increase in urban population discussed. The Chinese National Bureau of Statistics confirmed in 2011, for the first time in China’s history, more of the population resided in urban rather than rural locations (UNDP, 2013). As a result of this growth, environmental degradation has been a mounting issue over the past two decades. Thus, more effort has been directed at enhancing environmental awareness through publicity, education and greater commitments to international environmental treaties. These efforts aim to ensure that natural resources are used more efficiently using more environmentally friendly technologies (Mol and Carter, 2007: 2). One of these commitments is the 12th Five-year plan for National and Social Development that was released in 2011, calling for a 16% reduction in energy intensity and 17% reduction in CO2 emission per unit of GDP by 2015 (Baeumler et al., 2013). Given that it is estimated that cities currently account for 75% of the world’s energy consumption and 80% of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions” (Nan Zhou, 2012), the trend of population growth in Chinease cities undoubtly poses a major challenge.

= '''The evolution of Low Carbon Eco-City concepts''' =

With challenge comes opportunity. The growth of urban areas has provided a platform to demonstrate how cities can support a less resource intensive and more ecologically friendly way of functioning. Over the last century, advocates of urban planning have demonstrated that urbanisation does not inevitably result in negative outcomes for the ecological and the wider environmental health of a city. Urban growth can also lead to making use of redundant and potentially contaminated land through remediation. There are additional positive socio-economic benefits including; enhanced employment opportunities, provision of services such as education and healthcare, less need to travel long distances for everyday needs and better quality and number of community resources for recreational uses. However, it is important that cities are planned and designed in a sustainable way that allows such benefits to be realised.

Such opportunities have been encapsulated in the Eco-City initiative, which was first coined in 1987 by urban ecologist Richard Register, who described an Eco-City as an “ecologically healthy city”. More recently the World Bank has defined Eco-Cities as “places that strive to function harmoniously with natural systems and value their ecological assets, as well as the regional and global ecosystems on which we depend” the result is that they “drastically reduce the net damage to the local and global environment, while improving the overall well-being of their citizens and the local economy” (Suzuki et al., 2010: xvii).

It was the well-known report of the Bruntland Commission (''Our Common Future)'', in ''1987'' and the subsequent Agenda 21 that stemmed from the 1992 United Nations Conference on Economic and Environment and Development, which resulted in the prominence of sustainability in the political arena. The report and conference aimed to address climate change, ensure the longevity of our ecosystems and embed sustainable approaches in all aspects of human living, at both the local, national and global level. This is encapsulated in the term sustainable development which has since been both widely accepted and used. The concept of the Eco-City began gaining momentum in the aftermath of Agenda 21, and emphasised the ecological aspects of sustainability. In its infancy the concept was largely conceptual, described by Roseland as ‘a collection of…ideas about urban planning, transportation, health, housing, economic development, natural habitats, public participation and social justice…’ (1997: 197). It was not until the 90’s that some of these largely aspirational concepts began to be realised and applied in urban areas.

In recent years the Eco-Cites concept has been combined with that of Low Carbon cities, highlighting the need to address the issues of increasing carbon emissions alongside resource efficiency and environmentally friendly practices and considering these in a way that does not hinder economic growth:

“Cities that embark on a low-carbon transformation will also become more liveable, efficient, competitive and ultimately sustainable. Low carbon growth only adds another imperative to solve the immediate development concerns of Chinese cities.”

(Baeumler et al., 212: xxxix)

This evolution increases the challenge but represents; a more collective approach to integrating sustainably at the city scale in China, a need to address globalisation and modernise urban planning concepts, all of which are being driven by the mainstreaming of both policy uptake and its practical implementation. There have been many high profile organisations and academic institiutions engaged in Low Carbon Eco-Cities reasearch and iniatives in recent years such as; the European Commission’s Eco-City Project (www.ecocity-project.eu), the International Ecocity Framework and Standards Initiative (www.sustainabledevelopment.un.org), The International Eco-Cities Initiative (www.westminster.ac.uk/ecocities) and The Clinton Climate Cities Programme (www.clintonfoundation.org). Furthermore, in light of China’s population growth in conjunction with rising carbon emissions, the country has become the hosting ground for pilot Eco-City projects. This includes that of the; World Wildlife Fund, who are engaged in piloting a “low-carbon city development programme” and the Switzerland-China Low Carbon Cities Project which is using nine cities in China to pilot criteria relating to “city management, low-carbon economy, transportation, and green building” (Nan Zhou, 2012).

= '''The Low Carbon Eco-city Challenge: A ''''''Green Economy? ''' =

One of the major reasons for China’s growing interest in Low Carbon Eco-Cities is as a result of the legacy left from an intensive industrial past and a remaining “urban-industrial driven economic base supported by a highly successful export-led manufacturing industry” (Wong and Yuen, 2011: 134). These industries are continuing to expand, and as a result there is a growing need to address pollution in the major cities. It was reported that “less than 1% of the 500 largest cities in China meet the air quality standards recommended by the World Health Organization, and 7 of its cities are ranked among the 10 most polluted cities in the world” (Hongling Liua, 2014). Additionally, 40% of China’s carbon emissions are from power generation, with a further 40% attributed to industrial activities. In light of these figures, how are we then to create the 'compassionate relationship between society and nature' that Richard Register (2006: 214) sought to achieve back in 1987? And how can the urban environment function in an economically profitable way? Given China’s lack of practical experience dealing with pollution linked to these industries, the Low Carbon Eco-City initiative has been adopted, encouraging ecological industrial metabolism, whereby environmental protection and resource conservation are essential through measures such as material re-use, efficient transportation, renewable energy sources and the entire lie-cycle production (Ecocity Builders, 2014).

These principles are encapsulated in the term green capitalism as “a set of responses to environmental change and environmentalism that relies on harnessing capital investment, individual choices, and entrepreneurial innovation to the green cause” (Prudham, 2009: 1595). The green economy is a paradigm of ecological modernisation, which rests on a belief that environmental protection is a precondition of long-term economic development and that its protection is not a brake to economic growth (Mol, 2001). The City of Dongtan is an example of the Chinese Government’s approach to ecological modernisation, whose goals were to “found natural capital- and knowledge-based industrial clusters [and] to establish a research and education centre for ecological sciences” (Chang, 2013: 65). Both goals aimed to work with the island’s fishery and farming based economies through these new “environmental industries” (ibid.). Such activities are pertinent in China in light of the high CO2 emissions from power generation and industry, as the concept not only promotes greener forms of industry, but also encourages renewable forms of generation to power economic activities within a city. The notion of green capitalism and ecological modernisation, in the words of Prytherch, “constructs nature only to promote its destruction” (2002: 787). This is representative of some of the arguments against ecological modernisation and shows how contested this area of research remains. Put simply, the movement to a green economy will fall short if it is assumed that the economy and environment are seamlessly compatible. And secondly, if the focus is solely on the economy and environment, the social dimension of sustainability is largely ignored.

It has been reported that between 230 and 300 Chinese cities are aiming to be recognised as eco-cities (Nan Zhou, 2012) (The UK-China Eco-cities and Green Building Group, 2012). However these targets, pilots, high level definitions and concepts do little in the way of providing guidance as to how we may classify a city as a Low Carbon eco-city, this has been reiterated by numerous authors in this field (see Hongling Liua, 2014 and Nan Zhou, 2012). The way China responds to the complex challenges outlined in this article will characterise the form of the country’s urban landscape for future generations. Given the enormity of the challenge in operating at the city scale and imbedding these largely aspirational concepts there has been a significant performance gap between the aims and the actual outcome for the city. And so, the key question is whether cities can be planned and built to; thrive economically and drive social cohesion, whilst promoting Low Carbon lifestyles, and ecological protection?

= '''A Framework supporting large scale sustainability''' =

A sustainability framework could perhaps be the answer. The majority of work being undertaken in China relating to low-carbon eco-cites is focused on specific initiatives or the formulation of indicators, spanning categories such as energy, water and transport (Nan Zhou, 2012). In this section BREEAM Communities will be presented as a sustainability framework that could offer an alternative approach to collectively address the issues highlighted above. BREEAM Communities covers the masterplanning phase of large scale development and it sits as part of the wider BREEAM family (see image below). BREEAM first emerged in 1990 as the world’s first environmental assessment method for buildings.

[[File:BREEAM Communities.jpg]] 

Following its success at the building level – driving sustainable building and design with over 425,000 certified developments internationally, the robust scientific principles sitting behind the building level schemes have since been applied to the neighbourhood scale – BREEAM Communities. This framework supports equal and holistic integration of social, economic and environmental sustainability into the design and planning of large scale developments. Furthermore, it can facilitate the integration of Low Carbon design and technologies, as well as addressing pollution issues and ensuring that the ecology of an area is recognised, enhanced and not jeopardised by industrial activity.

The fundamental difference between indicators and frameworks is that indicators quantify, in this case, urban sustainability, with the aim of defining specific elements and thus are particularly difficult to apply to different social contexts. Indicators offer detailed information, however, are they really driving progression? Frameworks on the other hand, combine targets and indicators under a common process, promoting an integrated approach (Joss, 2012). As such, indicators support a somewhat top-down approach whilst frameworks support a bottom-up approach.

This paper has not set out to critique indicators, nor is it to propose that BREEAM Communities will act as a means of classing an Eco-City. As is evident from the discussion so far, there is no agreement on one single model that produces the “perfect” Eco-City. However, BREEAM Communities is a framework focused on process; effectively imbedding numerous indicators into sustainable masterplanning (see [http://www.breeam.org/communities www.breeam.org/communities] for a copy of the technical manual). This approach suits the variable nature of the three pillars of sustainability, particularly in relation to social issues, which are notoriously hard to measure. But by integrating social considerations and capturing the needs and priorities of society, in this process driven framework, we can build the foundations which balance social cohesion against economic progression and environmental protection.

The UK-China Eco-cities and Green Building Group (2012) identifies three goals which should be reflected in eco-city planning and design covering; housing provision, economic prosperity, addressing climate change and resource conservation. It goes on to identify that “energy efficiency and effectiveness in buildings is still a key issue in China” and that the barriers to eco-city initiatives include; poor stakeholder engagement and poor socio-economic consideration. This is confirmed by numerous other authors including; Hongling Liua (2014), who state that “more holistic approaches are needed for integrated urban planning” and Wong and Yuen (2011: 140) who comment that in order to address the aforementioned challenges, a city should promote “green energy based public transit and other environmentally friendly buildings and infrastructure”. The BREEAM Communities framework not only addresses the goals identified above but as a result of the larger scale at which the framework is implemented and its affinity with the BREEAM building level schemes, it can act to facilitate the realisation of greater sustainability gains at the building level. It has been reported that the BREEAM building level schemes are gaining momentum in China as the benefits are being realised. Recently, leading Chinese developer Franshion was awarded the country’s first BREEAM Outstanding design stage certification for “The Living Lattice” in Changsha, Hunan Province. Such a project will act as an exemplar for thousands of future buildings in China and world-wide (Building4change, 2013).

In terms of the Low Carbon aspects of the scheme it clearly addresses energy use in a number of ways including reducing demand through energy efficient measures such as; site layout, use of natural ventilation and wind management and selecting the most appropriate decentralised and or LZC (Low and Zero Carbon) technologies. In this way the scheme acts to facilitate Low Carbon lifestyles, appropriate to the area and the needs of the community. Carbon emissions are further considered in terms of embodied carbon of materials and transport. Pushing market best practice is one of the central goals of the BREEAM standard. One of the ways this is achieved is through facilitating innovation of new green technologies to help transition cities into the desired Low Carbon era.

Taking the example of Caofeidian Eco-City in China; it incorporates many different technologies including a site wide underground pneumatic solid waste system, grey/black water treatment system and various renewable technologies. The ambition to integrate numerous technologies is likely to be a common feature in future Low Carbon Eco-Cities projects. What is crucial is that this is implemented in an integrated manner, ensuring a dialogue between all stakeholders. BREEAM Communities facilitates this dialogue, ensuring these conversations are initiated in the early stages of the masterplanning process between the community, engineers, architects and the design team, in order to maximise the benefits from these technologies and other sustainability measures. What is evident in the context of Eco-City initiatives, is a lack of consultation throughout the design, planning and implementation phases (Joss and Molella, 2013). This should be fundamental and can be facilitated through a bottom-up approach to the planning and implementation of low-carbon eco-cities, offering a dynamic and inclusive process to maximise the sustainable gains for the city. This is a key principle in BREEAM Communities, as it ensures that the needs of those living in these places are met, and that they play a role in the long-term success of sustainable places.

BREEAM Communities does not only consider the impact and outcomes of a development in isolation as was the case in Caofeidian Eco-City. Joss and Molella highlight a potential disconnect between Caofeidian and its hinterland, both of which had differing approaches to sustainable development. Subsequently, the environmental benefits were not fully realised (2013: 123). This was reiterated in the World Bank’s analysis of Tianjin Eco-City. Here it was highlighted by Axel Baeumler, that there is a “risk of viewing the city’s sustainability features in isolation, with limited wider impact unless… treated as part of a larger regional and economic context” (World Bank, 2009). Tianjin has some of China’s strictest building energy-efficiency standards. BREEAM Communities can be used in this context, to support the ambitions of even the most forward thinking Eco-City initiatives, while still recognising the need to do this with the surrounding area in mind.

BREEAM Communities has been used on a range of developments around the world including both regeneration and new build developments. The developments have ranged in scale, from small infill projects of 5 hectares to large sites up to 200 hectares. The scheme can also be applied in a phased approach, which supports its application on larger scales. BRE Global is yet to trial the framework at the city scale; however they are in the process of determining its applicability (BREEAM Communities, 2014). However, it would seem that the majority of the aims through which the scheme is applied would hold true at the city scale through the phased approach.

= '''Conclusion''' =

This article has demonstrated how the concept of Eco-Cities has evolved and how it has since been combined with Low Carbon initiatives to represent a more holistic concept – which can be considered to be more comprehensive in terms of sustainable development. The challenge is clear; China will be required to respond quickly to the predicted urbanisation rates in order to ensure that a balance is maintained between environmental protection and social cohesion, while still supporting the economic growth of cities. The Chinese Government is very conscious of the challenges and has begun implementing policies and supporting initiatives to ensure China’s rapidly evolving economy does not compromise environmental and social integration and integrity in the urban setting. The decisions made now will be fundamental for the future of the urban landscape in China.

Given the potential significance of Low Carbon Eco-Cites in addressing issues associated with urbanisation and climate change, it is not surprising that research has focused on defining these concepts and assigning indicators to establish the success of these initiatives. Despite this, a consensus has yet to be made on how to create or define a Low Carbon Eco-City, with the reality likely to be largely contextual. However, initiatives such as The Leverhulme Eco-Cities Initiative (Joss, 2012) are engaged in making comparative assessments of the existing frameworks, standards and indicators, including BREEAM Communities. There is a clear opportunity here to test frameworks such as BREEAM Communities, to determine if the benefits that have been proved at the community level elsewhere, can support the Eco-City initiative in China – this bottom-up and holistic approach seems key to support the need for improved stakeholder engagement. BREEAM Communities could support a step change towards self-sufficient and fully functioning places, with comparatively low impacts on the environment and the wider ecosystems in which these cities are located.

= '''References''' =

Baeumler, A., Ijjasz-Vasquez, E., & Mehndiratta, S. (Eds.). (2012). ''Sustainable Low-Carbon City Development in China''. World Bank-free PDF. Available online: [http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTNEWSCHINESE/Resources/3196537-1202098669693/4635541-1335945747603/low_carbon_city_full_en.pdf http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTNEWSCHINESE/Resources/3196537-1202098669693/4635541-1335945747603/low_carbon_city_full_en.pdf]

Baeumler, A., Chen, M., Dastur, A., Zhang, Y., Filewood, R., Al-Jamal, K.,. & Pinnoi, N. (2009). Sino-Singapore Tianjin eco-city: A case study of an emerging eco-city in China. ''Technical Assistance Report, World Bank, Washington DC''.

Building4Change (2013). Available online: [http://www.building4change.com/page.jsp?id=2117 http://www.building4change.com/page.jsp?id=2117]. Last accessed 28/01/2014.

BREEAM Communities (2014). BREEAM Communities Webpage. Available online: [http://www.breeam.org/page.jsp?id=372 http://www.breeam.org/page.jsp?id=372]. Last accessed 30.01.2014.

Clinton Climate Initiative.'' C40-CCI Cities ''(2014). Available online: [http://www.clintonfoundation.org/our-work/clinton-climate-initiative/programs/c40-cci-cities http://www.clintonfoundation.org/our-work/clinton-climate-initiative/programs/c40-cci-cities]. Last accessed 24/01/2014.

Eco-City Builders (2014). Available online: [http://www.ecocitybuilders.org/why-ecocities/the-solution/guidelines-for-ecocity-development/ http://www.ecocitybuilders.org/why-ecocities/the-solution/guidelines-for-ecocity-development/]. Last accessed 26.01.2014.

Hongling Liua, G. Z. (2014). Analysis of sustainable urban development approaches in China. ''Habitat International '', 24-32.

Joss, S. (2009) Eco-cities: a global survey. ''WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment'', 129, pp. 239–250, 2010.

Joss, S (2011). Eco-cities: the mainstreaming of urban sustainability; key characteristics and driving factors. ''International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning'', 6 (3): 268-285.

Joss, S., Tomozeiu, D. & Cowley, R. (2012). Eco-city indicators: governance challenges. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 155: 109-120.

Joss, S., & Molella, A. (2013). The Eco-City as Urban Technology: Perspectives on Caofeidian International Eco-City (China). ''Journal of Urban Technology'', 20 (1): 115-137.

Joss, S., Kargon, R. & Molella, A. (2013). Eco-Cities in Pan-Asia: International Discourses, Local Practices. From the Guest Editors. ''Journal of Urban Technology'', 20 (1): 1-5.

Joss, S., Cowley, R. & Tomozeiu, D. (2013). Towards the ‘ubiquitous eco-city’: an analysis of the internationalisation of eco-city policy and practice. ''Journal of Urban Research & Practice''.

Mol, A. P. J. (2001). Globalization and Environmental Reform: The Ecological Modernization of the Global Economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Mol, A. P. J. & Carter, N. T. (2007). China’s environmental governance in transition. In N. T. Carter & A. P. J. Mol (Eds.), Environmental governance in China (pp. 1–22). London: Routledge.

Nan Zhou, G. H. (2012). ''China's Development of Low-Carbon Eco-Cities and Associated Indicator Systems.'' Berkeley Lab.

Prudham, S. (2009). Pimping climate change: Richard Branson, global warming, and the performance of green capitalism. ''Environment and planning. A'', ''41''(7), 1594.

Roseland, M. (1997). Dimensions of the eco-city. ''Cities'', ''14''(4), 197-202.

The CONCERTO Initiative (2014). Available online: [http://www.ecocity-project.eu/TheConcertoInitiative.html http://www.ecocity-project.eu/TheConcertoInitiative.html]. Last accessed 24.01.2014.

United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), Population Division (2012). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2011 Revision. Available online: [http://esa.un.org/unup/pdf/WUP2011_Highlights.pdf http://esa.un.org/unup/pdf/WUP2011_Highlights.pdf]. Last accessed 27.01.2014).

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2013. China National Human Development Report 2013 Sustainable and Liveable Cities: Toward Ecological Civilization. Available online: [http://www.undp.org/content/dam/china/docs/Publications/UNDP-CH_2013%20NHDR_EN.pdf http://www.undp.org/content/dam/china/docs/Publications/UNDP-CH_2013%20NHDR_EN.pdf]. Last accessed 21.01.2014.

University of Westminster, International Eco-Cities Initiative (2014). Available online: [http://www.westminster.ac.uk/csd/funded-research/international-eco-cities-initiative http://www.westminster.ac.uk/csd/funded-research/international-eco-cities-initiative]. Last accessed 24.01.2014.

United Nations Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform (UN SDKP). Available online: [http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=1006&menu=1348&nr=66 http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=1006&menu=1348&nr=66]. Last accessed 24.01.2014.

[[Category:International]]
[[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]
[[Category:Standards_/_measurements]]

File:BREEAM Communities.jpg

2015-01-23T10:55:17Z

BRE Group: BREEAM Communities

BREEAM Communities

The Future of Electricity in Domestic Buildings

2014-12-01T16:26:57Z

BRE Group:

by Andrew Williams BRE

This paper reviews some of the key issues surrounding the supply, distribution and use of electricity in domestic buildings. Its primary aim is to consider the electricity system in a holistic, albeit simple, way and thereby identify some of the inter-relationships and inevitable compromises that inherently arise. By adopting a ‘horizontal’ system wide review the hope is that the paper stimulates an integrated system wide debate surrounding how electricity in domestic buildings will evolve in the future. Only by doing this will electricity generation and consumption be harmonised with national targets and future consumer lifestyle need.

The paper is in response to a number of potentially significant changes in the production and consumption of electricity in domestic buildings, these include:
*Challenging CO2 reduction targets
*The use of more intermittent renewable and inflexible nuclear generation
*Smart meters and a potentially more dynamic electricity tariff structure
*The growth in local generation through for example, renewable energy installations
*Electric vehicles and heat pumps
*Changing appliance and device electricity demand profiles
*Smart devices (controllable and Internet (IP) addressable)
*Alternative domestic networks
*Conversion efficiencies
*Electricity storage
*Novel control scenarios.

The paper focuses on on-grid domestic buildings only and considerers how the changing supply environment driven by the need to reduce carbon emissions and ensure security of supply will impact the domestic electricity installation and the consumer in the future. The paper questions whether there are alternatives to the existing 230 V AC domestic electricity system and if so how they compare today and how they might evolve to meet the future of electricity.

The paper breaks the electricity system down in to its component parts and by doing so attempts to disaggregate the functional performance of each part and identify its potential strength and weakness. Each component or building block can then be considered in the context of the existing 230 V AC electricity system or how it might work with any new solution or technology that may come along in the future. Also, by taking this approach new ideas or solutions that may have several distinct strands of technological or market benefit can be deconstructed to identify the parts that are backwards compatible with the existing 230 V electricity supply.

By taking a relatively holistic view the paper also brings in to sharp focus the compromises that, like in any system, need to be made both in terms of technical performance, practical delivery and financial constraints. There are many apparently very justifiable reasons to optimise the domestic electricity system in the future not least because of micro-generation, the proliferation of low power low voltage DC devices, high power heat pumps and electric vehicles. While each sub-system might bring advantages it is a truism that, in general, as a system becomes more bespoke it often becomes less flexible. While inevitably new electricity sub-systems will arise in the future based on a case-by-case basis, when taking an overarching view of electricity in domestic buildings, an equally valid question is how can the existing 230 V AC system be made more efficient and flexible in the future? Can it be made more agile and adaptable to a wide range of loads with the help of new hardware, the smart agenda, system integration and intelligence? If it can then the smart agenda may be able to configure what we have today to maintain its flexibility in terms of the loads it can supply while becoming more bespoke in terms of how and when, and against what outcome, this happens - essentially providing the best of both worlds.

The paper considers the fundamental differences between AC and DC and how these impact practical electricity systems. While AC has dominated electricity supply and demand for many years there are still many situations where DC is used and this is likely to increase with the growth in electronic devices, renewable energy and electricity storage. As to whether DC on its own has any real advantages in like-for-like situations over AC is highly dependent on the particular circumstances. As a result it brings in to question whether there is one size that fits all and if not whether the technical or commercial reasons are strong enough for more than one electricity system to be introduced in to housing up and down the country.

The paper considers the life cycles associated with different components within the electricity system. This is particularly important as they vary widely. The buildings themselves and the existing electricity system can be classed as very slow changing whereas many of the electronic devices that now consume electricity no longer resemble those of ten years ago let alone when the National Grid was established back in 1933. This raises a debate as to whether there is a better way to supply these new relatively fast changing devices or whether the fact they are fast changing could provide the opportunity for improving the way they perform in relation to the existing 230 V system in the future.

= [[File:The_Future_of_Electricity_in_Domestic_Buildings.pdf|Download the report in full.]] =

== Key words ==

domestic electricity; networks and systems; appliances and devices; electricity generation; smart grids; electricity storage; local generation; renewable energy; demand management

[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]
[[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]
[[Category:Standards_/_measurements]]
[[Category:Sustainability]]

The Future of Electricity in Domestic Buildings

2014-12-01T16:22:04Z

BRE Group:

by Andrew Williams BRE

This paper reviews some of the key issues surrounding the supply, distribution and use of electricity in domestic buildings. Its primary aim is to consider the electricity system in a holistic, albeit simple, way and thereby identify some of the inter-relationships and inevitable compromises that inherently arise. By adopting a ‘horizontal’ system wide review the hope is that the paper stimulates an integrated system wide debate surrounding how electricity in domestic buildings will evolve in the future. Only by doing this will electricity generation and consumption be harmonised with national targets and future consumer lifestyle need.

The paper is in response to a number of potentially significant changes in the production and consumption of electricity in domestic buildings, these include:
*Challenging CO2 reduction targets
*The use of more intermittent renewable and inflexible nuclear generation
*Smart meters and a potentially more dynamic electricity tariff structure
*The growth in local generation through for example, renewable energy installations
*Electric vehicles and heat pumps
*Changing appliance and device electricity demand profiles
*Smart devices (controllable and Internet (IP) addressable)
*Alternative domestic networks
*Conversion efficiencies
*Electricity storage
*Novel control scenarios.

The paper focuses on on-grid domestic buildings only and considerers how the changing supply environment driven by the need to reduce carbon emissions and ensure security of supply will impact the domestic electricity installation and the consumer in the future. The paper questions whether there are alternatives to the existing 230 V AC domestic electricity system and if so how they compare today and how they might evolve to meet the future of electricity.

The paper breaks the electricity system down in to its component parts and by doing so attempts to disaggregate the functional performance of each part and identify its potential strength and weakness. Each component or building block can then be considered in the context of the existing 230 V AC electricity system or how it might work with any new solution or technology that may come along in the future. Also, by taking this approach new ideas or solutions that may have several distinct strands of technological or market benefit can be deconstructed to identify the parts that are backwards compatible with the existing 230 V electricity supply.

By taking a relatively holistic view the paper also brings in to sharp focus the compromises that, like in any system, need to be made both in terms of technical performance, practical delivery and financial constraints. There are many apparently very justifiable reasons to optimise the domestic electricity system in the future not least because of micro-generation, the proliferation of low power low voltage DC devices, high power heat pumps and electric vehicles. While each sub-system might bring advantages it is a truism that, in general, as a system becomes more bespoke it often becomes less flexible. While inevitably new electricity sub-systems will arise in the future based on a case-by-case basis, when taking an overarching view of electricity in domestic buildings, an equally valid question is how can the existing 230 V AC system be made more efficient and flexible in the future? Can it be made more agile and adaptable to a wide range of loads with the help of new hardware, the smart agenda, system integration and intelligence? If it can then the smart agenda may be able to configure what we have today to maintain its flexibility in terms of the loads it can supply while becoming more bespoke in terms of how and when, and against what outcome, this happens - essentially providing the best of both worlds.

The paper considers the fundamental differences between AC and DC and how these impact practical electricity systems. While AC has dominated electricity supply and demand for many years there are still many situations where DC is used and this is likely to increase with the growth in electronic devices, renewable energy and electricity storage. As to whether DC on its own has any real advantages in like-for-like situations over AC is highly dependent on the particular circumstances. As a result it brings in to question whether there is one size that fits all and if not whether the technical or commercial reasons are strong enough for more than one electricity system to be introduced in to housing up and down the country.

The paper considers the life cycles associated with different components within the electricity system. This is particularly important as they vary widely. The buildings themselves and the existing electricity system can be classed as very slow changing whereas many of the electronic devices that now consume electricity no longer resemble those of ten years ago let alone when the National Grid was established back in 1933. This raises a debate as to whether there is a better way to supply these new relatively fast changing devices or whether the fact they are fast changing could provide the opportunity for improving the way they perform in relation to the existing 230 V system in the future.

= [http://The_Future_of_Electricity_in_Domestic_Buildings.pdf Download the report in full.] =

== Key words ==

domestic electricity; networks and systems; appliances and devices; electricity generation; smart grids; electricity storage; local generation; renewable energy; demand management

[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]
[[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]
[[Category:Standards_/_measurements]]
[[Category:Sustainability]]

The Future of Electricity in Domestic Buildings

2014-12-01T16:20:30Z

BRE Group: Created page with " by Andrew Williams BRE This paper reviews some of the key issues surrounding the supply, distribution and use of electricity in domestic buildings. Its primary aim is to consid..."

File:The Future of Electricity in Domestic Buildings.pdf

2014-12-01T16:11:53Z

BRE Group: This paper reviews some of the key issues surrounding the supply, distribution and use of electricity in domestic buildings. Its primary aim is to consider the electricity system in a holistic, albeit simple, way and thereby identify some of the inter-rel

This paper reviews some of the key issues surrounding the supply, distribution and use of
electricity in domestic buildings. Its primary aim is to consider the electricity system in a holistic,
albeit simple, way and thereby identify some of the inter-relationships and inevitable
compromises that inherently arise. By adopting a ‘horizontal’ system wide review the hope is
that the paper stimulates an integrated system wide debate surrounding how electricity in
domestic buildings will evolve in the future. Only by doing this will electricity generation and
consumption be harmonised with national targets and future consumer lifestyle need.

Biodiversity in the urban environment

2014-11-10T08:35:52Z

BRE Group:

= Report by Katie Johnson, BRE =

= Executive Summary =

Urban development can have a significant impact on our natural habitats. With habitat modification having been identified as one of the most important drivers of biodiversity loss, the urban environment is becoming an increasingly expanding geographical area that could be used to support wildlife.

From the introduction of green infrastructure, to the engagement and active participation of local communities and city residents, there are numerous ways in which the urban environment can be developed to promote the integration of biodiversity.

This report examines the feasibility studies carried out by thirty UK councils for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme. 90% of participating cities identified the environment as a key challenge that needed to be addressed, while half of the cities presented strategies that would be beneficial for biodiversity, supporting and encouraging urban wildlife such as pollinator and bird species. UK case studies and innovative ideas combining biodiversity and the urban environment are also presented in this report. They highlight the range of initiatives that are being implemented within urban environments across the UK, presenting actions that are being taken to promote biodiversity within new developments, as well as improving biodiversity within existing towns and cities.

With the expected continued expansion of the world’s urban environment, natural habitats and biodiversity are in a fragile position. However, as highlighted, numerous methods and innovative solutions are being developed and integrated into urban landscape. This indicates that the issues surrounding biodiversity loss are slowly being realised, with actions being taken to try to address them within the urban environment.

= Introduction =

The term biodiversity has prompted several definitions since its emergence in the field of conservation. A formal definition from the International Convention on Biological Diversity [1] indicates it is the variety of living organisms across all ecosystems, and the ecological complexes they are part of, including diversity within, and between, species and ecosystems. Although humans have been aware for centuries that nature helps support societies, the explicit acknowledgment of ‘ecosystem services’ i.e. the conditions and processes provided by natural ecosystems and species that support and sustain human life, is comparatively recent [2].

As well as obvious food sources, nature provides countless crucial ‘ecosystem services’ that allow human existence. From the creation of breathable air to the supply of clean water, even seemingly insignificant insects provide vital ecological services including pest control, pollination, and wildlife nutrition [3]. Conservation of biodiversity will assist in maintaining ecosystem services that are essential for human life to persist. However, anthropogenic impacts have devastated, degraded or influenced almost all natural habitats on earth and species extinction rates are now 1000 times higher than background rates [4].

With the continued expansion of towns and cities, urban development can significantly impact on natural habitats. Habitat modification, i.e. the replacement of natural, native habitats with urban areas, or cultivated land, has been identified as one of the most important drivers of biodiversity loss, hence the urban environment is becoming a predominant area that could be used to support wildlife. From the development of green spaces, such as public parks, to the construction of green walls and roofs, these areas can provide a refuge for wildlife and play an important role within the urban landscape.

In addition to providing important habitats for wildlife in urban areas, the introduction of green walls and green roofs to the urban environment has been linked to numerous other benefits including; reduction in energy consumption, and therefore CO2 emissions, of a building (due to the insulating properties of green roofs), helping to reduce the urban heat island effect, and filtering airborne particles and pollutants from the atmosphere so improving air quality. Green spaces within cities can play a significant role in preventing localised flooding as part of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS), while also providing community engagement through activities such as communal gardening, food growing and outdoor recreation.

= Future Cities visions and interactions with biodiversity =

Thirty UK councils were selected to carry out feasibility studies for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme that identify how they could integrate their transport, communications and other infrastructure to improve the local economy, increase quality of life and reduce impact on the environment [5].

An analysis of these feasibility studies highlighted that 90% of participating cities identified the environment as a key challenge, while half of the cities presented ambitions and strategies that would be beneficial for biodiversity, supporting and encouraging urban wildlife. Several key biodiversity linked themes were identified within the innovative development schemes submitted by the 30 UK cities including community engagement and integration, quality of life and green infrastructure.

= Community engagement and integration =

Engaging communities and encouraging the active participation of city residents in local events and activities can have several benefits for both people and nature. Community engagement opportunities can help to raise awareness of biodiversity whilst providing informal education opportunities for residents to learn about their local environment. Enhancing public understanding and enjoyment of nature can help foster positive public attitudes towards biodiversity and the natural environment [6], while involving the community at the initial stage of local decision making, such as the development of green spaces, can enable residents to gain an improved sense of ownership of a project or area. This can generate numerous benefits, from encouraging positive behavioural change (e.g. refraining from littering), to promoting engagement in conservation activities, or activities to enhance the natural environment [7]. Engaging and involving residents can also provide opportunities for the regeneration of local community areas as well as empowering neighbourhood initiatives. Groundwork [8], a nationwide charity, works with local communities delivering thousands of projects each year to help re-connect people with nature and transform whole neighbourhoods, whilst also provide training and improving people’s prospects.

Engagement with the local communities is a key point highlighted by almost all cities involved with the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme, recognising the role local citizens can play in the growth and development of an area. Cardiff city council has a Sustainability Unit specifically aimed at maintaining sufficient connectivity between external, community-led, and internal, government-led, sustainability initiatives operating across the city, while Swindon has developed a strong green spaces network, established in partnership with local community organisations. Swindon is also aiming to increase the level and diversity of community participation in the city planning process.

The London Borough of Camden and Belfast City both focus on community food production schemes. Camden are planning to engage with local food growing networks to initiate the community schemes, and the support provided for resident-led micro enterprises allows local citizens to generate income from their produce, increasing the local sustainable food supply. Belfast City has instigated a project enabling a suburban community to become a resilient, self-sustaining part of the city by establishing a community led food and energy production project. As well as developing a partially self-reliant area of the city this scheme will also promote community cohesion and improved community relations

= Quality of Life =

Recent research has highlighted the significant benefits urban green space can deliver for mental wellbeing, recording lower levels of mental distress and significantly higher wellbeing (life satisfaction) in citizens living in areas with more green space [9]. The Faculty of Public Health, in association with Natural England, has also emphasised that increasing contact with green spaces can reduce symptoms of poor mental health and stress, whilst improving mental wellbeing across all age groups [10]. Green spaces can include a wide range of environments, from formally designated parks and recreational grounds, to more ‘natural’ areas such as river bank corridors [11]. Within urban environments, green spaces can also be generated through the construction of green roofs, living walls and tree-lined streets. The promotion of green spaces both within and surrounding urban environments is strongly associated with the positive biodiversity benefits highlighted within the Community engagement and Green Infrastructure sections of this report.

Green open spaces have also been shown to encourage physical activity, a key factor in living a healthy lifestyle and reducing weight related medical issues [12]. Studies have revealed a positive relationship between access to natural environments and increased rates of physical activity [13], with tree-lined routes offering extra motivation to walk, in comparison to routes without trees [14], green space within walking distance promoting physical activity outside the home [15] [16] and increased access to urban green space associated with increased amounts of play [17] and improved concentration and motor skills in children.

Several city feasibility studies submitted to the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme promote encouragement of health and wellbeing through the improvement of green open spaces, and commitments to greener cities or boroughs to ensure a greater quality of life for residents. Leeds-Bradford include in their vision an aim to understand the value of green urban spaces, identifying green areas in which to promote engagement of communities with their green spaces, encouraging exercise to promote weight loss and the reduction of poor health. Swindon also has ambitions to further improve access to, and quality of, parks, open spaces, in conjunction with improving links to surrounding rural areas, promoting and guaranteeing health and wellbeing benefits for all Swindon citizens.

= Green infrastructure =

Green infrastructure (GI) is one of the most commonly recurring themes in the feasibility studies for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme. Proposals range from increasing green civic space to initiatives involving green walls, green roofs, streetscape greening, and urban agriculture programmes.

GI can be viewed as a network of green features, delivering a wide range of environmental and quality of life benefits [18]. It can include parks, playing fields, woodlands, grasslands, open spaces, wetlands, river and canal corridors allotments and even private gardens. It should aim to enhance and restore areas, as well creating new wildlife habitats, integrating biodiversity into the built environment. Connectivity is a key theme encouraged in the development of GI, allowing the movement of species and enabling the built environment to be permeable to wildlife.

GI can also provide numerous other environmental benefits as well as offering a refuge for wildlife within the urban environment. The majority of ground surfaces within cities are made from impermeable materials such as concrete. This prevents draining of rainwater through permeation, leading to a high volume of surface run-off and increasing the issue of localised flooding within the urban environment. Research by the University of Manchester [19] has shown that increasing the green space cover in urban areas by 10% reduces surface run-off by almost 5%. As urban trees intercept large quantities of rainfall, increasing tree cover in urban areas by 10 % can reduce surface water run-off up to a further 6 %. The permeability and absorption properties of GI that help moderate runoff can help to buffer cities from flooding impacts, preventing localised flooding as part of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). A study focusing on New York City has analysed the costs of upgrading and developing additional hard ‘grey’ infrastructure (such as sewer systems, tanks, pipes etc.) to cope with the flooding and sewer overflow issues within the city. Results have indicated that a GI plan, design to deal with the same issues of flooding and sewer overflow within the city, would not only bring the additional benefits associated with GI but also cost approximately $1.5 billion less than the hard ‘grey’ infrastructure strategy [20].

Green walls and green roofs within cities also provide the opportunity to replace some habitats that have been lost to the development of an urban area. They can be specifically designed to provide habitats and food sources for insects, birds and rare species of plants whilst also benefiting the urban environment in numerous other ways. Green walls and roofs have been strongly linked to a reduction in the urban heat island effect, a temperature disparity between urban and rural areas which exacerbates ground-level ozone production, predicted to increase with global temperatures. The evaporation and evapotranspiration associated with vegetated walls and roofs lowers surrounding air temperature, hence reducing the urban heat island effect [21]. The thermal properties of vegetated walls and roofs has also been shown to positively impact on the energy consumption of a building [22]. Improving the insulating qualities can help reduce heating requirement during winter months while also reducing the need for air conditioning in summer, hence contributing to lower CO2 emissions. The modelling of buildings by Environment Canada has shown that a saving of 4.15kW/hours/m2/year can be made in reduced air conditioning costs by installing a green roof, and the installation of a green roof at Paradise Park in the London Borough of Islington has negated the need for air conditioning to be installed, leading to an energy reduction of 800kW/hrs and a saving of 1.6 CO2 tonnes [23].

Increasing vegetated building surfaces in urban areas can also help improve local air quality by reducing the production of ozone. Furthermore, vegetation can assist with the removal of airborne particles, heavy metals and volatile organic compounds from the local atmosphere.

Over half of the cities feasibility studies for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme incorporated the improvement and development of comprehensive green infrastructure strategies. Many highlight the link between GI and health and wellbeing; Leeds-Bradford plan to identify areas for investment in green infrastructure on the basis of health and care demographics, and Plymouth promote GI development for its ‘significant health benefits’, while Camden and Salford specifically identify greening programmes designed to mitigate the urban heat island effect. Camden borough council also highlight the green employment and training opportunities that could arise from the development of GI across the borough, helping establish a local greening social enterprise.

= Innovation in biodiversity =

== Urban Farming ==

A primary driving force behind land conversion and intensification of agriculture is the global human population increase, an indirect driver of biodiversity change identified by the Millennium ecosystem assessment [24]. As natural ecosystems are converted to agricultural land to meet an increasing global food demand for the growing population, two proposed methods to meet these growing demands have emerged, increasing habitat conversion to agricultural production, or increasing agriculture intensification (Green et al., 2005). Both of these ideas could potentially be extremely detrimental to natural habitats and wildlife, however some alternative solutions have begun to emerge.

Urban farms, allotments, even rooftop permaculture farms could assist in reducing the pressure to convert further land to agriculture by supplying city dwellers with locally sourced produce. As well as providing a refuge for wildlife, community managed city farms can also provide education as well as promoting well-functioning and sustainable communities. The development of urban farms, which can provide multi-functional habitats for wildlife within the built environment, has been on the increase for some time however other forms of urban farming are also beginning to appear.

== Vertical farming ==

Vertical farming is an innovative concept that has attracted a great deal of attention in recent years, with high potential for reducing the area of land that would need to be converted to agricultural land. Vertical farming is the cultivation of vegetation on a vertically inclined surface, or within a ‘skyscraper greenhouse’. ‘Edible walls’ are those which are commonly constructed on an external vertical surface of a building, or on purposely built inclining surfaces, design solely for edible vegetation. This concept of vertical farming benefits biodiversity in much the same way as the previously mentioned green walls. As well as increasing green corridors and connectivity throughout the urban environment, these ‘edible walls’ can offer an essential food source for pollinator species such as bees, butterflies and hoverflies within a city. They can provide habitats for invertebrate species which in turn can attract birds and bats into the urban environment.

Vertical farming (on a commercial scale) which utilises high rise buildings has a number of floors supporting crops which are grown in carefully selected and monitored environmental conditions. The advantages and disadvantages of this method of vertical farming have been thoroughly debated, including those for biodiversity [25]. As previously mentioned, agriculture has been strongly linked to the loss of biodiversity at a worldwide scale. The development of vertical farming in skyscrapers has the benefit of theoretically being able to return a large proportion of currently farmed land back to its natural state, allowing ecosystem services and functions to be restored, recreating natural habitats. Current estimates suggest that one acre of vertical farm could be equivalent to ten to twenty traditional soil-based acres depending on the crop [26]. The pollution of waterways from sediment and nutrient runoff from agricultural landscapes has been well documented [27], and it has been suggested that vertical farming can eliminate agricultural runoff. This reduction of excessive nutrients in waterways could potentially improve freshwater biodiversity and reduce issues associated with eutrophication [28].

== Aquaponics ==

Aquaponics is a method of growing vegetation and aquatic animals, such as fish and snails, in a mutually beneficial cycle. Excretion from the fish is deposited in the water, bacteria convert this waste into nutrients suitable for plant uptake, and this water is then transferred to the tank in which the vegetation is growing for the vegetation to use the nutrients for growth. This ‘filtered’ water is then recycled back to the tank containing the fish.

Without the need for fertile land, aquaponic crops can be grown on land that is otherwise unsuitable for agriculture (land with poor fertility, contaminated land etc.) providing alternative areas of land rather than converting further natural habitats into agricultural land. Tanks can also be stacked vertically therefore having the potential to provide a significant food source whilst reducing the area of land needed to be converted to agricultural land.

The volume of water required for plant growth in aquaponic systems is minimal in comparison to conventional agricultural activities where water is lost through runoff and ground water supplies [29]. In aquaponic systems water is re-used through biological filtration and recirculation, hence reducing the burden on water supplies, especially in hotter months. In addition, aquaponics does not require chemical fertilisers, due to the recirculation of nutrients in the fish waste, hence helping to reduce the vast quantities of nutrients entering our freshwater systems [30] and affecting aquatic biodiversity, as previously discussed.

== Citizen science ==

Citizen science is a method of involving general public participation in scientific data collection. Including the general public directly in the monitoring, recording, and outcomes of a project can lead to large volumes of data being recorded over a wide area, and participation is usually on a voluntary basis, therefore a cost-effective method of environmental data collection. Participants collect data following a set procedures and data is usually submitted to a central location for examination and analysis by researchers and scientists.

Over recent years there has been a large expansion in the diversity and scale of projects involving citizen science. The issue of biodiversity is currently high on the agenda, with the accelerating rate of biodiversity decline and increasing impact of threats, making it critical to detect trends in biodiversity as quickly as possible and requiring large volumes of data. The advancement of technological developments has increased the ease at which people can become involved with research, and is revolutionising citizen science.

Smart phone apps are creating a new era in the world of data collection, especially with the addition of GPS which has accurate locating abilities. The ease at which members of the public can submit geolocated photographs has made the validation and verification of species, habitats and diseases a fast and feasible process [31]. Numerous biodiversity related research projects have already implemented the use of smart phone apps such as BirdTrack [32], using web-based platform for recording bird sightings, Leaf Watch [33], allowing the collection of geolocated photographs for tracking horse chestnut disease, and Project BudBurst [34] which collects plant observations throughout the seasons. Web-based data capture and smartphone apps are becoming commonly applied to biodiversity research, and developments are currently underway to integrate environmental sensors into citizen science, for example, by integrating increasing advanced software into smartphones.

These technological advances provide a great potential for crowd-sourcing (the collection of data by large numbers of volunteers) which is crucial in the urban environment. When studying biodiversity within any environment, landowner consent is often required. In urban environments this problem is magnified by the issue that numerous small parcels of land are owned by individual home owners. Any habitat or wildlife monitoring and research that takes place is therefore often regulated by landowner approval of a project. The promotion of citizen science often gives participants a sense of involvement and opportunity to influence the outcome of the project, hence encouraging participation. Although the scale of activity that each individual city landowner can contribute is often minimal due to the size of their land, the combined efforts could generate cumulative impacts at a much larger, meaningful scale.

= Case Studies =

== Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership ==

Formed in 2007, the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership brings together eight regional authorities as well as Forestry Commission Scotland, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), Scottish Enterprise, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Glasgow Centre for Population Health [35]. With the aim to create a large, functional green network, connecting green spaces across the Glasgow and Clyde Valley regions, one of the key outcomes is protecting and enhancing wildlife and the environment by providing accessible, quality green spaces.

[[File:Glasgow and clyde.jpg|463x244px]]Image Courtesy of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership

Significant urban regeneration and expansion is expected across the Glasgow and Clyde Valley regions in the coming years, hence the Partnership are suggesting an Integrated Green Infrastructure approach for the future developments. This approach incorporates GI at the initial design stage of a built environment, integrating it within the planning of ‘grey’ infrastructure- transport, energy, water and waste. Including GI at the initial planning stage of a development allows the consideration of the process of linking green space, creating green corridors and providing active travel routes and habitats for wildlife.

For new developments in Scotland, surface water runoff should be directed through SUDS. The Partnership feel this legal obligation provides substantial opportunities to develop ‘naturalised' SUDS features, such as wetlands and ponds. By integrating these into the built environment they can become multi-functional GI features, benefiting wildlife, local communities as well as functioning as a flood defence mechanism. Integrated Habitat Network models (spatial planning tools) are used to identify potential wildlife habitats within a proposed development, allowing GI to be incorporated into the urban environment in the most beneficial way for biodiversity, while also aligning with surface water management needs.

 

== Bristol’s urban farms ==

Bristol has five large urban farms spread across the city as well as numerous allotment sites and community gardens. Many have been developed on disused and brownfield sites, including those of The Severn Project which has converted a fly tipping site and contaminated land adjacent to one of the main railway stations, into several acres of thriving urban farms [36]. As well as regenerating large areas of disused urban land to provide locally sourced food, urban farms also promote ecological diversity. Bee hives have been introduced to the sites to promote ecosystem pollination services, and corridors of land have been set aside for wildlife providing access to the wetlands created within the urban farm and providing a safe refuge.

[[File:Bristol.jpg|1278x720px]]<img _cke_saved_src="Bristol.jpg" _fck_mw_filename="Bristol.jpg" class="fck_mw_border fck_mw_right" src="/w/images/d/d2/Bristol.jpg" /> 

Community engagement is another key ambition for Bristol’s city farms. The majority of allotments are volunteer and community based such as the Easton Community Garden [37], and The Golden Hill Community Garden [38], providing opportunities to be involved with growing local produce as well as pond dipping biodiversity education for younger age groups, while some of the larger urban farms provide therapeutic support, training, education and employment opportunities for the local community [39]. Providing productive communal land can unite local residents, raise health awareness and morale among the community. The Seven Project urban farms also provide social re-integration opportunities and have a policy of creating employment for people facing significant barriers to the workplace. They help socially excluded groups to build new and rewarding lives through their experiences at the urban farms.

 

== Green walls and roofs in London ==

The Mayor of London has a current target to increase green cover by 5% across central London by 2030 [40]. As a results GI, especially green roofs and walls, are being promoted across the city with an aim to increase installation on both new developments and through the retrofit of existing buildings. As well as enhancing the biodiversity of the city the principle benefits of green walls and roofs in London are; helping London to adapt to climate change, reducing energy emissions, reducing urban heat island effect, enhancing amenity value and providing effective SUDS.

[[File:Rubens.jpg|600x400px]]Image courtesy of Rubens at the Palace

London already has numerous green walls and roofs across the city, and with a city policy that expects major developments to incorporate living roofs and walls where feasible, and encourages the use of living roofs in smaller developments and extensions, the number of new and retro fitted developments that incorporates GI is expected to increase. The Greater London Authority has also funded numerous Green Infrastructure Audits, a mapping process that identifies new locations suitable for green space, including green walls and roofs. Over 500 hectares of the city have been audited, which identified the potential for over 300 rain gardens, 200 green walls and more than 100 hectares of green roofs [41].

London’s largest green wall has recently been constructed at The Rubens at the Palace Hotel in Victoria. Covering 350 m2 and composed of 16 tons of soil and 10,000 plants, the entire façade of the hotel has been transformed. In an area of London where surface water drains can become overwhelmed during heavy rainfall, the green wall has been specifically designed to minimize surface water flooding by irrigating the vegetation using harvested rainwater. Species of plants used were recommended by The Royal Horticultural Society as key species for attracting and supporting butterflies, bees and birds.

= Summary =

With the expected continued expansion of the world’s urban environment, natural habitats and biodiversity are in a fragile position. However, as highlighted, numerous methods and innovative solutions are being developed and integrated into the urban landscape. With 90% of cities participating in the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme identifying the environment as a key concern, issues surrounding the natural environment are beginning to play a significant role in future developments of the urban landscape.

As the greening of towns and cities has been linked to the numerous benefits discussed within this paper, the increasing introduction of green spaces, GI and urban farming initiatives indicates that the issues surrounding biodiversity loss are slowly being realised, with actions being taken to try to address them within the urban environment.

A concept repeatedly occurring across the theme of biodiversity within towns and cities is that of community engagement and integration. Involving local residents in decision making not only provides a sense of ownership of a project or area but can also encourage positive behavioural change, promote engagement in conservation activities and increasingly educates citizens about biodiversity related issues. The advancement in citizen science and the ease with which people can contribute to research activities, assisting with the provision of vast quantities of data and information, can allow increased investigation into issues that would otherwise often be costly and time consuming.

Although habitat loss and species extinction rates deliver alarming figures, the issues surrounding biodiversity change are beginning to be addressed within the urban environment. The case studies highlight the range of initiatives that are being implemented within urban environments across the UK, presenting actions that are being taken to promote biodiversity within new developments, as well as improving biodiversity within existing towns and cities. If future councils and government take a lead from the positive examples that are emerging in isolated areas across the UK, and the implementation of these initiatives is allowed to continue, the negative impacts urban development can impose on biodiversity may begin to be minimized, while at the same time integrating biodiversity into our towns and cities.

= References =

[1] Convention on biological diversity, Rio de Janeiro, 1992, [[http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf]]

[2] Mooney, H. A., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1997) Ecosystem services: a fragmentary history, In G. C. Daily, ed. ''Nature's Services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems'', Pages 11-19, Island Press, Washington DC

[3] Losey, J. E., & Vaughan, M. (2006) The economic value of ecological services provided by insects. ''BioScience'', 56(4), 311-323

[4] MEAb, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) ''Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends, Volume 1, ''Island Press, Washington, DC

[5] Future Cities Demonstrator Programme , City Councils' Feasibilities Studies, [[https://connect.innovateuk.org/web/future-cities-special-interest-group/feasibility-studies https://connect.innovateuk.org/web/future-cities-special-interest-group/feasibility-studies]]

[6] DEFRA, 2007, Guidance for Public Authorities on Implementing the Biodiversity Duty, [[https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69311/pb12585-pa-guid-english-070516.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69311/pb12585-pa-guid-english-070516.pdf]]

[7] Natural England, 2013, [http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/4986723251519488 A sense of ownership: Fostering a change in the relationship between people and the natural environment], available at [[http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/10382390?cache=1385568320.4 http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/10382390?cache=1385568320.4]]

[8] Groundwork, Changing places, changing lives, The Federation of Groundwork Trusts, [[http://www.groundwork.org.uk http://www.groundwork.org.uk]]

[9] [[http://www.ecehh.org/research-projects/urban-green-space/ http://www.ecehh.org/research-projects/urban-green-space/]]

[10] Faculty of Public Health, 2010, Great Outdoors: How Our Natural Health Service Uses Green Space To Improve Wellbeing, [[http://www.fph.org.uk/uploads/bs_great_outdoors.pdf http://www.fph.org.uk/uploads/bs_great_outdoors.pdf]]

[11] National Audit Office (2006) ''Enhancing Urban Green Space ''[[http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0506/enhancing_urban_green_space.aspx http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0506/enhancing_urban_green_space.aspx]]

[12] Townshend, T., 2012, Obesity, physical activity & neighbourhood greenness, ''Green Places'', 18-21

[13] Bird W (2007) ''Natural Thinking: Investigating The Links Between The Natural Environment, Biodiversity and Mental Health''. RSPB.

[14] Bird W, Adams F (2001) “Common Health Walks: A 4 Year Review” ''Walking The 21st Century''. Perth

[15] Giles-Corti B,Donovan RJ (2003) “Relative Influence Of Individual, Social Environmental, And Physical Environmental Correlates Of Walking” ''American Journal of Public Health ''93(9): 1583–1589

[16] Tanaka A, Takano T,Nakamura K et al (1996). ”Health Levels Influence By Urban Residential Conditions In A Megacity – Tokyo” ''Urban Stud ''33:879–945

[17] Sallis JF, Nadir PR, Broyles SL, et al. (1995) “Correlates Of Physical Activity At Home In Mexican-American And Anglo- American Preschool Children” ''Health Psychology ''12:390-8

[18] Natural England, Green Infrastructure, [[http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/planningdevelopment/greeninfrastructure/default.aspx http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/planningdevelopment/greeninfrastructure/default.aspx]

[19] [[http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.org.uk/sustainable-places/advice/green-infrastructure-and-flood-risk http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.org.uk/sustainable-places/advice/green-infrastructure-and-flood-risk]]

[20] NYC Green Infrastructure Plan, a sustainable strategy for clean waterways, The City of New York Office of the Mayer, [[http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/green_infrastructure/NYCGreenInfrastructurePlan_ExecutiveSummary.pd http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/green_infrastructure/NYCGreenInfrastructurePlan_ExecutiveSummary.pd]] 

[21] Livingroofs.org, Urban Heat Island Effect, [[http://http://livingroofs.org/2010030566/green-roof-benefits/heatisland.html http://http://livingroofs.org/2010030566/green-roof-benefits/heatisland.html]]

[22] The Green Roof Centre, Reducing storm-water runoff as part of a sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) strategy, [[http://www.thegreenroofcentre.co.uk/green_roofs/benifits_of_green_roofs http://www.thegreenroofcentre.co.uk/green_roofs/benifits_of_green_roofs]]

[23] Environment Agency, The benefits of green walls, [[http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/sectors/91970.aspx http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/sectors/91970.aspx]]

[24] MEAa, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) ''Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis''. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC

[25] Banerjee, C. (2012). ''Market Analysis for Terrestrial Application of Advanced Bio-Regenerative Modules: Prospects for Vertical Farming'' (Doctoral dissertation, Master Thesis).

[26] Despommier, D. (2009). The Vertical Farm: Reducing the impact of agriculture on ecosystem functions and services. Accessible at [[http://www.verticalfarm.com/more?essay1 http://www.verticalfarm.com/more?essay1]]

[27] Howarth, W. (2011). Diffuse water pollution and diffuse environmental laws. ''Journal of Environmental Law'', 23(1), pp. 129–130.

[28] Tilman, D., Fargione, J., Wolff, B., D'Antonio, C., Dobson, A., Howarth, R., Shindler, D., Schlesinger, W. H., Sinberloff, D. and Swackhamer, D. (2001). Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. ''Science'', 292(5515), pp. 281-284.

[29] Goodman, E. R. (2011). ''Aquaponics: community and economic development'' (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

[30] Blidariu, F., & Grozea, A. (2011). Increasing the Economical Efficiency and Sustainability of Indoor Fish Farming by Means of Aquaponics-Review. ''Lucrări ştiinţifice Zootehnie şi Biotehnologii, Timişoara'', ''44''(2).

[31] Roy, H.E., Pocock, M.J.O., Preston, C.D., Roy, D.B., Savage, J., Tweddle, J.C. & Robinson, L.D. (2012) Understanding Citizen Science & Environmental Monitoring. Final Report.

[32] BirdTrack, [[http://blx1.bto.org/birdtrack/main/data-home.jsp http://blx1.bto.org/birdtrack/main/data-home.jsp]]

[33] Concer Tree Science, Leaf Watch [[http://leafwatch.naturelocator.org/ http://leafwatch.naturelocator.org/]]

[34] Project BudBurst, [[http://budburst.org/gomobile.php http://budburst.org/gomobile.php]]

[35] GVC Green Network Partnership, [[http://www.gcvgreennetwork.gov.uk/ http://www.gcvgreennetwork.gov.uk/]]

[36] The Severn Project, Our Urban Farms, [[http://thesevernproject.org/our-urban-farms.html http://thesevernproject.org/our-urban-farms.html]]

[37] Easton Community Garden, [[http://eastoncommunitygarden.org.uk/ http://eastoncommunitygarden.org.uk/]]

[38] The Golden Hill Community Garden, [[http://thegoldenhillcommunitygarden.com/pond/ http://thegoldenhillcommunitygarden.com/pond/]]

[39] The Severn Project, Our Impact, [[http://thesevernproject.org/our-impact.html http://thesevernproject.org/our-impact.html]]

[40] GLA, Urban greening, [[http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/greening-london/urban-greening http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/greening-london/urban-greening]]

[41] GLA, Greening the BIDs, [[http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/greening-london/urban-greening/greening-bids http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/greening-london/urban-greening/greening-bids]]

[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]
[[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]

User:BRE Group

2014-11-07T16:25:39Z

BRE Group:

BRE is a world leading building science centre that generates new knowledge through research. This is used to create products, tools and standards that drive positive change across the built environment. BRE helps its government and private sector clients meet the significant environmental, social and economic challenges they faces in delivering homes, buildings and communities.

BRE is owned by the BRE Trust, a registered charity. The Trust uses the profits made by the BRE companies to fund research and education that advances knowledge of the built environment.

Biodiversity in the urban environment

2014-11-07T15:51:52Z

BRE Group: Created page with "<h1> Report by Katie Johnson, BRE</h1> <h1> Executive Summary</h1> Urban development can have a significant impact on our natural habitats. With habitat modification havi..."

<h1>
Report by Katie Johnson, BRE</h1>
<h1>
Executive Summary</h1>

Urban development can have a significant impact on our natural habitats. With habitat modification having been identified as one of the most important drivers of biodiversity loss, the urban environment is becoming an increasingly expanding geographical area that could be used to support wildlife.

From the introduction of green infrastructure, to the engagement and active participation of local communities and city residents, there are numerous ways in which the urban environment can be developed to promote the integration of biodiversity.

This report examines the feasibility studies carried out by thirty UK councils for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme. 90% of participating cities identified the environment as a key challenge that needed to be addressed, while half of the cities presented strategies that would be beneficial for biodiversity, supporting and encouraging urban wildlife such as pollinator and bird species. UK case studies and innovative ideas combining biodiversity and the urban environment are also presented in this report. They highlight the range of initiatives that are being implemented within urban environments across the UK, presenting actions that are being taken to promote biodiversity within new developments, as well as improving biodiversity within existing towns and cities.

With the expected continued expansion of the world’s urban environment, natural habitats and biodiversity are in a fragile position. However, as highlighted, numerous methods and innovative solutions are being developed and integrated into urban landscape. This indicates that the issues surrounding biodiversity loss are slowly being realised, with actions being taken to try to address them within the urban environment.



<h1>
Introduction</h1>


The term biodiversity has prompted several definitions since its emergence in the field of conservation. A formal definition from the International Convention on Biological Diversity [1] indicates it is the variety of living organisms across all ecosystems, and the ecological complexes they are part of, including diversity within, and between, species and ecosystems. Although humans have been aware for centuries that nature helps support societies, the explicit acknowledgment of ‘ecosystem services’ i.e. the conditions and processes provided by natural ecosystems and species that support and sustain human life, is comparatively recent [2].

As well as obvious food sources, nature provides countless crucial ‘ecosystem services’ that allow human existence. From the creation of breathable air to the supply of clean water, even seemingly insignificant insects provide vital ecological services including pest control, pollination, and wildlife nutrition [3]. Conservation of biodiversity will assist in maintaining ecosystem services that are essential for human life to persist. However, anthropogenic impacts have devastated, degraded or influenced almost all natural habitats on earth and species extinction rates are now 1000 times higher than background rates [4].

With the continued expansion of towns and cities, urban development can significantly impact on natural habitats. Habitat modification, i.e. the replacement of natural, native habitats with urban areas, or cultivated land, has been identified as one of the most important drivers of biodiversity loss, hence the urban environment is becoming a predominant area that could be used to support wildlife. From the development of green spaces, such as public parks, to the construction of green walls and roofs, these areas can provide a refuge for wildlife and play an important role within the urban landscape.

In addition to providing important habitats for wildlife in urban areas, the introduction of green walls and green roofs to the urban environment has been linked to numerous other benefits including; reduction in energy consumption, and therefore CO2 emissions, of a building (due to the insulating properties of green roofs), helping to reduce the urban heat island effect, and filtering airborne particles and pollutants from the atmosphere so improving air quality. Green spaces within cities can play a significant role in preventing localised flooding as part of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS), while also providing community engagement through activities such as communal gardening, food growing and outdoor recreation.
 

<ol>
<li value="2">
Future Cities visions and interactions with biodiversity</li>
</ol>


Thirty UK councils were selected to carry out feasibility studies for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme that identify how they could integrate their transport, communications and other infrastructure to improve the local economy, increase quality of life and reduce impact on the environment [5].

An analysis of these feasibility studies highlighted that 90% of participating cities identified the environment as a key challenge, while half of the cities presented ambitions and strategies that would be beneficial for biodiversity, supporting and encouraging urban wildlife. Several key biodiversity linked themes were identified within the innovative development schemes submitted by the 30 UK cities including community engagement and integration, quality of life and green infrastructure.

<h1>
Community engagement and integration</h1>


Engaging communities and encouraging the active participation of city residents in local events and activities can have several benefits for both people and nature. Community engagement opportunities can help to raise awareness of biodiversity whilst providing informal education opportunities for residents to learn about their local environment. Enhancing public understanding and enjoyment of nature can help foster positive public attitudes towards biodiversity and the natural environment [6], while involving the community at the initial stage of local decision making, such as the development of green spaces, can enable residents to gain an improved sense of ownership of a project or area. This can generate numerous benefits, from encouraging positive behavioural change (e.g. refraining from littering), to promoting engagement in conservation activities, or activities to enhance the natural environment [7]. Engaging and involving residents can also provide opportunities for the regeneration of local community areas as well as empowering neighbourhood initiatives. Groundwork [8], a nationwide charity, works with local communities delivering thousands of projects each year to help re-connect people with nature and transform whole neighbourhoods, whilst also provide training and improving people’s prospects.

Engagement with the local communities is a key point highlighted by almost all cities involved with the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme, recognising the role local citizens can play in the growth and development of an area. Cardiff city council has a Sustainability Unit specifically aimed at maintaining sufficient connectivity between external, community-led, and internal, government-led, sustainability initiatives operating across the city, while Swindon has developed a strong green spaces network, established in partnership with local community organisations. Swindon is also aiming to increase the level and diversity of community participation in the city planning process.

The London Borough of Camden and Belfast City both focus on community food production schemes. Camden are planning to engage with local food growing networks to initiate the community schemes, and the support provided for resident-led micro enterprises allows local citizens to generate income from their produce, increasing the local sustainable food supply. Belfast City has instigated a project enabling a suburban community to become a resilient, self-sustaining part of the city by establishing a community led food and energy production project. As well as developing a partially self-reliant area of the city this scheme will also promote community cohesion and improved community relations

<h2>
</h2>
<h1>
Quality of Life</h1>


Recent research has highlighted the significant benefits urban green space can deliver for mental wellbeing, recording lower levels of mental distress and significantly higher wellbeing (life satisfaction) in citizens living in areas with more green space [9]. The Faculty of Public Health, in association with Natural England, has also emphasised that increasing contact with green spaces can reduce symptoms of poor mental health and stress, whilst improving mental wellbeing across all age groups [10]. Green spaces can include a wide range of environments, from formally designated parks and recreational grounds, to more ‘natural’ areas such as river bank corridors [11]. Within urban environments, green spaces can also be generated through the construction of green roofs, living walls and tree-lined streets. The promotion of green spaces both within and surrounding urban environments is strongly associated with the positive biodiversity benefits highlighted within the Community engagement and Green Infrastructure sections of this report.

Green open spaces have also been shown to encourage physical activity, a key factor in living a healthy lifestyle and reducing weight related medical issues [12]. Studies have revealed a positive relationship between access to natural environments and increased rates of physical activity [13], with tree-lined routes offering extra motivation to walk, in comparison to routes without trees [14], green space within walking distance promoting physical activity outside the home [15] [16] and increased access to urban green space associated with increased amounts of play [17] and improved concentration and motor skills in children.

Several city feasibility studies submitted to the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme promote encouragement of health and wellbeing through the improvement of green open spaces, and commitments to greener cities or boroughs to ensure a greater quality of life for residents. Leeds-Bradford include in their vision an aim to understand the value of green urban spaces, identifying green areas in which to promote engagement of communities with their green spaces, encouraging exercise to promote weight loss and the reduction of poor health. Swindon also has ambitions to further improve access to, and quality of, parks, open spaces, in conjunction with improving links to surrounding rural areas, promoting and guaranteeing health and wellbeing benefits for all Swindon citizens.



<h1>
Green infrastructure</h1>


Green infrastructure (GI) is one of the most commonly recurring themes in the feasibility studies for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme. Proposals range from increasing green civic space to initiatives involving green walls, green roofs, streetscape greening, and urban agriculture programmes.

GI can be viewed as a network of green features, delivering a wide range of environmental and quality of life benefits [18]. It can include parks, playing fields, woodlands, grasslands, open spaces, wetlands, river and canal corridors allotments and even private gardens. It should aim to enhance and restore areas, as well creating new wildlife habitats, integrating biodiversity into the built environment. Connectivity is a key theme encouraged in the development of GI, allowing the movement of species and enabling the built environment to be permeable to wildlife.

GI can also provide numerous other environmental benefits as well as offering a refuge for wildlife within the urban environment. The majority of ground surfaces within cities are made from impermeable materials such as concrete. This prevents draining of rainwater through permeation, leading to a high volume of surface run-off and increasing the issue of localised flooding within the urban environment. Research by the University of Manchester [19] has shown that increasing the green space cover in urban areas by 10% reduces surface run-off by almost 5%. As urban trees intercept large quantities of rainfall, increasing tree cover in urban areas by 10 % can reduce surface water run-off up to a further 6 %. The permeability and absorption properties of GI that help moderate runoff can help to buffer cities from flooding impacts, preventing localised flooding as part of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). A study focusing on New York City has analysed the costs of upgrading and developing additional hard ‘grey’ infrastructure (such as sewer systems, tanks, pipes etc.) to cope with the flooding and sewer overflow issues within the city. Results have indicated that a GI plan, design to deal with the same issues of flooding and sewer overflow within the city, would not only bring the additional benefits associated with GI but also cost approximately $1.5 billion less than the hard ‘grey’ infrastructure strategy [20].

Green walls and green roofs within cities also provide the opportunity to replace some habitats that have been lost to the development of an urban area. They can be specifically designed to provide habitats and food sources for insects, birds and rare species of plants whilst also benefiting the urban environment in numerous other ways. Green walls and roofs have been strongly linked to a reduction in the urban heat island effect, a temperature disparity between urban and rural areas which exacerbates ground-level ozone production, predicted to increase with global temperatures. The evaporation and evapotranspiration associated with vegetated walls and roofs lowers surrounding air temperature, hence reducing the urban heat island effect [21]. The thermal properties of vegetated walls and roofs has also been shown to positively impact on the energy consumption of a building [22]. Improving the insulating qualities can help reduce heating requirement during winter months while also reducing the need for air conditioning in summer, hence contributing to lower CO2 emissions. The modelling of buildings by Environment Canada has shown that a saving of 4.15kW/hours/m2/year can be made in reduced air conditioning costs by installing a green roof, and the installation of a green roof at Paradise Park in the London Borough of Islington has negated the need for air conditioning to be installed, leading to an energy reduction of 800kW/hrs and a saving of 1.6 CO2 tonnes [23].

Increasing vegetated building surfaces in urban areas can also help improve local air quality by reducing the production of ozone. Furthermore, vegetation can assist with the removal of airborne particles, heavy metals and volatile organic compounds from the local atmosphere.

Over half of the cities feasibility studies for the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme incorporated the improvement and development of comprehensive green infrastructure strategies. Many highlight the link between GI and health and wellbeing; Leeds-Bradford plan to identify areas for investment in green infrastructure on the basis of health and care demographics, and Plymouth promote GI development for its ‘significant health benefits’, while Camden and Salford specifically identify greening programmes designed to mitigate the urban heat island effect. Camden borough council also highlight the green employment and training opportunities that could arise from the development of GI across the borough, helping establish a local greening social enterprise.





<h1>
Innovation in biodiversity</h1>

<h2>
Urban Farming</h2>


A primary driving force behind land conversion and intensification of agriculture is the global human population increase, an indirect driver of biodiversity change identified by the Millennium ecosystem assessment [24]. As natural ecosystems are converted to agricultural land to meet an increasing global food demand for the growing population, two proposed methods to meet these growing demands have emerged, increasing habitat conversion to agricultural production, or increasing agriculture intensification (Green et al., 2005). Both of these ideas could potentially be extremely detrimental to natural habitats and wildlife, however some alternative solutions have begun to emerge.

Urban farms, allotments, even rooftop permaculture farms could assist in reducing the pressure to convert further land to agriculture by supplying city dwellers with locally sourced produce. As well as providing a refuge for wildlife, community managed city farms can also provide education as well as promoting well-functioning and sustainable communities. The development of urban farms, which can provide multi-functional habitats for wildlife within the built environment, has been on the increase for some time however other forms of urban farming are also beginning to appear.



<h2>
Vertical farming</h2>


Vertical farming is an innovative concept that has attracted a great deal of attention in recent years, with high potential for reducing the area of land that would need to be converted to agricultural land. Vertical farming is the cultivation of vegetation on a vertically inclined surface, or within a ‘skyscraper greenhouse’. ‘Edible walls’ are those which are commonly constructed on an external vertical surface of a building, or on purposely built inclining surfaces, design solely for edible vegetation. This concept of vertical farming benefits biodiversity in much the same way as the previously mentioned green walls. As well as increasing green corridors and connectivity throughout the urban environment, these ‘edible walls’ can offer an essential food source for pollinator species such as bees, butterflies and hoverflies within a city. They can provide habitats for invertebrate species which in turn can attract birds and bats into the urban environment.

Vertical farming (on a commercial scale) which utilises high rise buildings has a number of floors supporting crops which are grown in carefully selected and monitored environmental conditions. The advantages and disadvantages of this method of vertical farming have been thoroughly debated, including those for biodiversity [25]. As previously mentioned, agriculture has been strongly linked to the loss of biodiversity at a worldwide scale. The development of vertical farming in skyscrapers has the benefit of theoretically being able to return a large proportion of currently farmed land back to its natural state, allowing ecosystem services and functions to be restored, recreating natural habitats. Current estimates suggest that one acre of vertical farm could be equivalent to ten to twenty traditional soil-based acres depending on the crop [26]. The pollution of waterways from sediment and nutrient runoff from agricultural landscapes has been well documented [27], and it has been suggested that vertical farming can eliminate agricultural runoff. This reduction of excessive nutrients in waterways could potentially improve freshwater biodiversity and reduce issues associated with eutrophication [28].



<h2>
Aquaponics</h2>


Aquaponics is a method of growing vegetation and aquatic animals, such as fish and snails, in a mutually beneficial cycle. Excretion from the fish is deposited in the water, bacteria convert this waste into nutrients suitable for plant uptake, and this water is then transferred to the tank in which the vegetation is growing for the vegetation to use the nutrients for growth. This ‘filtered’ water is then recycled back to the tank containing the fish.

Without the need for fertile land, aquaponic crops can be grown on land that is otherwise unsuitable for agriculture (land with poor fertility, contaminated land etc.) providing alternative areas of land rather than converting further natural habitats into agricultural land. Tanks can also be stacked vertically therefore having the potential to provide a significant food source whilst reducing the area of land needed to be converted to agricultural land.

The volume of water required for plant growth in aquaponic systems is minimal in comparison to conventional agricultural activities where water is lost through runoff and ground water supplies [29]. In aquaponic systems water is re-used through biological filtration and recirculation, hence reducing the burden on water supplies, especially in hotter months. In addition, aquaponics does not require chemical fertilisers, due to the recirculation of nutrients in the fish waste, hence helping to reduce the vast quantities of nutrients entering our freshwater systems [30] and affecting aquatic biodiversity, as previously discussed.

<h2>
</h2>
<h2>
Citizen science</h2>


Citizen science is a method of involving general public participation in scientific data collection. Including the general public directly in the monitoring, recording, and outcomes of a project can lead to large volumes of data being recorded over a wide area, and participation is usually on a voluntary basis, therefore a cost-effective method of environmental data collection. Participants collect data following a set procedures and data is usually submitted to a central location for examination and analysis by researchers and scientists.

Over recent years there has been a large expansion in the diversity and scale of projects involving citizen science. The issue of biodiversity is currently high on the agenda, with the accelerating rate of biodiversity decline and increasing impact of threats, making it critical to detect trends in biodiversity as quickly as possible and requiring large volumes of data. The advancement of technological developments has increased the ease at which people can become involved with research, and is revolutionising citizen science.

Smart phone apps are creating a new era in the world of data collection, especially with the addition of GPS which has accurate locating abilities. The ease at which members of the public can submit geolocated photographs has made the validation and verification of species, habitats and diseases a fast and feasible process [31]. Numerous biodiversity related research projects have already implemented the use of smart phone apps such as BirdTrack [32], using web-based platform for recording bird sightings, Leaf Watch [33], allowing the collection of geolocated photographs for tracking horse chestnut disease, and Project BudBurst [34] which collects plant observations throughout the seasons. Web-based data capture and smartphone apps are becoming commonly applied to biodiversity research, and developments are currently underway to integrate environmental sensors into citizen science, for example, by integrating increasing advanced software into smartphones.

These technological advances provide a great potential for crowd-sourcing (the collection of data by large numbers of volunteers) which is crucial in the urban environment. When studying biodiversity within any environment, landowner consent is often required. In urban environments this problem is magnified by the issue that numerous small parcels of land are owned by individual home owners. Any habitat or wildlife monitoring and research that takes place is therefore often regulated by landowner approval of a project. The promotion of citizen science often gives participants a sense of involvement and opportunity to influence the outcome of the project, hence encouraging participation. Although the scale of activity that each individual city landowner can contribute is often minimal due to the size of their land, the combined efforts could generate cumulative impacts at a much larger, meaningful scale.



<h1>
Case Studies</h1>

<h2>
Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership</h2>


Formed in 2007, the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership brings together eight regional authorities as well as Forestry Commission Scotland, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), Scottish Enterprise, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Glasgow Centre for Population Health [35]. With the aim to create a large, functional green network, connecting green spaces across the Glasgow and Clyde Valley regions, one of the key outcomes is protecting and enhancing wildlife and the environment by providing accessible, quality green spaces.

<img _cke_saved_src="Glasgow and clyde.jpg" _fck_mw_filename="Glasgow and clyde.jpg" class="fck_mw_border fck_mw_right" src="/w/images/0/01/Glasgow_and_clyde.jpg" />Image Courtesy of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership

Significant urban regeneration and expansion is expected across the Glasgow and Clyde Valley regions in the coming years, hence the Partnership are suggesting an Integrated Green Infrastructure approach for the future developments. This approach incorporates GI at the initial design stage of a built environment, integrating it within the planning of ‘grey’ infrastructure- transport, energy, water and waste. Including GI at the initial planning stage of a development allows the consideration of the process of linking green space, creating green corridors and providing active travel routes and habitats for wildlife.

For new developments in Scotland, surface water runoff should be directed through SUDS. The Partnership feel this legal obligation provides substantial opportunities to develop ‘naturalised' SUDS features, such as wetlands and ponds. By integrating these into the built environment they can become multi-functional GI features, benefiting wildlife, local communities as well as functioning as a flood defence mechanism. Integrated Habitat Network models (spatial planning tools) are used to identify potential wildlife habitats within a proposed development, allowing GI to be incorporated into the urban environment in the most beneficial way for biodiversity, while also aligning with surface water management needs.



<h2>
Bristol’s urban farms</h2>


Bristol has five large urban farms spread across the city as well as numerous allotment sites and community gardens. Many have been developed on disused and brownfield sites, including those of The Severn Project which has converted a fly tipping site and contaminated land adjacent to one of the main railway stations, into several acres of thriving urban farms [36]. As well as regenerating large areas of disused urban land to provide locally sourced food, urban farms also promote ecological diversity. Bee hives have been introduced to the sites to promote ecosystem pollination services, and corridors of land have been set aside for wildlife providing access to the wetlands created within the urban farm and providing a safe refuge.

<img _cke_saved_src="Bristol.jpg" _fck_mw_filename="Bristol.jpg" class="fck_mw_border fck_mw_right" src="/w/images/d/d2/Bristol.jpg" />Community engagement is another key ambition for Bristol’s city farms. The majority of allotments are volunteer and community based such as the Easton Community Garden [37], and The Golden Hill Community Garden [38], providing opportunities to be involved with growing local produce as well as pond dipping biodiversity education for younger age groups, while some of the larger urban farms provide therapeutic support, training, education and employment opportunities for the local community [39]. Providing productive communal land can unite local residents, raise health awareness and morale among the community. The Seven Project urban farms also provide social re-integration opportunities and have a policy of creating employment for people facing significant barriers to the workplace. They help socially excluded groups to build new and rewarding lives through their experiences at the urban farms.



<h2>
Green walls and roofs in London</h2>


The Mayor of London has a current target to increase green cover by 5% across central London by 2030 [40]. As a results GI, especially green roofs and walls, are being promoted across the city with an aim to increase installation on both new developments and through the retrofit of existing buildings. As well as enhancing the biodiversity of the city the principle benefits of green walls and roofs in London are; helping London to adapt to climate change, reducing energy emissions, reducing urban heat island effect, enhancing amenity value and providing effective SUDS.

<img _cke_saved_src="Rubens.jpg" _fck_mw_filename="Rubens.jpg" class="fck_mw_border fck_mw_right" src="/w/images/c/cf/Rubens.jpg" />Image courtesy of Rubens at the Palace

London already has numerous green walls and roofs across the city, and with a city policy that expects major developments to incorporate living roofs and walls where feasible, and encourages the use of living roofs in smaller developments and extensions, the number of new and retro fitted developments that incorporates GI is expected to increase. The Greater London Authority has also funded numerous Green Infrastructure Audits, a mapping process that identifies new locations suitable for green space, including green walls and roofs. Over 500 hectares of the city have been audited, which identified the potential for over 300 rain gardens, 200 green walls and more than 100 hectares of green roofs [41].

London’s largest green wall has recently been constructed at The Rubens at the Palace Hotel in Victoria. Covering 350 m2 and composed of 16 tons of soil and 10,000 plants, the entire façade of the hotel has been transformed. In an area of London where surface water drains can become overwhelmed during heavy rainfall, the green wall has been specifically designed to minimize surface water flooding by irrigating the vegetation using harvested rainwater. Species of plants used were recommended by The Royal Horticultural Society as key species for attracting and supporting butterflies, bees and birds.



<h1>
Summary</h1>


With the expected continued expansion of the world’s urban environment, natural habitats and biodiversity are in a fragile position. However, as highlighted, numerous methods and innovative solutions are being developed and integrated into the urban landscape. With 90% of cities participating in the Future Cities Demonstrator Programme identifying the environment as a key concern, issues surrounding the natural environment are beginning to play a significant role in future developments of the urban landscape.

As the greening of towns and cities has been linked to the numerous benefits discussed within this paper, the increasing introduction of green spaces, GI and urban farming initiatives indicates that the issues surrounding biodiversity loss are slowly being realised, with actions being taken to try to address them within the urban environment.

A concept repeatedly occurring across the theme of biodiversity within towns and cities is that of community engagement and integration. Involving local residents in decision making not only provides a sense of ownership of a project or area but can also encourage positive behavioural change, promote engagement in conservation activities and increasingly educates citizens about biodiversity related issues. The advancement in citizen science and the ease with which people can contribute to research activities, assisting with the provision of vast quantities of data and information, can allow increased investigation into issues that would otherwise often be costly and time consuming.

Although habitat loss and species extinction rates deliver alarming figures, the issues surrounding biodiversity change are beginning to be addressed within the urban environment. The case studies highlight the range of initiatives that are being implemented within urban environments across the UK, presenting actions that are being taken to promote biodiversity within new developments, as well as improving biodiversity within existing towns and cities. If future councils and government take a lead from the positive examples that are emerging in isolated areas across the UK, and the implementation of these initiatives is allowed to continue, the negative impacts urban development can impose on biodiversity may begin to be minimized, while at the same time integrating biodiversity into our towns and cities.



 
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />


[1] Convention on biological diversity, Rio de Janeiro, 1992, [http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf


[2] Mooney, H. A., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1997) Ecosystem services: a fragmentary history, In G. C. Daily, ed. Nature's Services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems, Pages 11-19, Island Press, Washington DC


[3] Losey, J. E., & Vaughan, M. (2006) The economic value of ecological services provided by insects. BioScience, 56(4), 311-323


[4] MEAb, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends, Volume 1, Island Press, Washington, DC


[5] Future Cities Demonstrator Programme , City Councils' Feasibilities Studies, [https://connect.innovateuk.org/web/future-cities-special-interest-group/feasibility-studies


[6] DEFRA, 2007, Guidance for Public Authorities on Implementing the Biodiversity Duty, [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69311/pb12585-pa-guid-english-070516.pdf


[7] Natural England, 2013, [http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/4986723251519488 A sense of ownership: Fostering a change in the relationship between people and the natural environment], available at [http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/10382390?cache=1385568320.4


[8] Groundwork, Changing places, changing lives, The Federation of Groundwork Trusts, [http://www.groundwork.org.uk


[9] [http://www.ecehh.org/research-projects/urban-green-space/


[10] Faculty of Public Health, 2010, Great Outdoors: How Our Natural Health Service Uses Green Space To Improve Wellbeing, [http://www.fph.org.uk/uploads/bs_great_outdoors.pdf


[11] National Audit Office (2006) Enhancing Urban Green Space [http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0506/enhancing_urban_green_space.aspx


[12] Townshend, T., 2012, Obesity, physical activity & neighbourhood greenness, Green Places, 18-21


[13] Bird W (2007) Natural Thinking: Investigating The Links Between The Natural Environment, Biodiversity and Mental Health. RSPB.


[14] Bird W, Adams F (2001) “Common Health Walks: A 4 Year Review” Walking The 21st Century. Perth


[15] Giles-Corti B,Donovan RJ (2003) “Relative Influence Of Individual, Social Environmental, And Physical Environmental Correlates Of Walking” American Journal of Public Health 93(9): 1583–1589


[16] Tanaka A, Takano T,Nakamura K et al (1996). ”Health Levels Influence By Urban Residential Conditions In A Megacity – Tokyo” Urban Stud 33:879–945


[17] Sallis JF, Nadir PR, Broyles SL, et al. (1995) “Correlates Of Physical Activity At Home In Mexican-American And Anglo- American Preschool Children” Health Psychology 12:390-8


[18] Natural England, Green Infrastructure, [http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/planningdevelopment/greeninfrastructure/default.aspx


[19] [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.org.uk/sustainable-places/advice/green-infrastructure-and-flood-risk


[20] NYC Green Infrastructure Plan, a sustainable strategy for clean waterways, The City of New York Office of the Mayer, [<a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/green_infrastructure/NYCGreenInfrastructurePlan_ExecutiveSummary.pd" target="_blank">http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/green_infrastructure/NYCGreenInfrastructurePlan_ExecutiveSummary.pdf</a>]


[21] Livingroofs.org, Urban Heat Island Effect, [<a href="http://http://livingroofs.org/2010030566/green-roof-benefits/heatisland.html" target="_blank">http://http://livingroofs.org/2010030566/green-roof-benefits/heatisland.html</a>]


[22] The Green Roof Centre, Reducing storm-water runoff as part of a sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) strategy, [<a href="http://www.thegreenroofcentre.co.uk/green_roofs/benifits_of_green_roofs" target="_blank">http://www.thegreenroofcentre.co.uk/green_roofs/benifits_of_green_roofs</a> ]


[23] Environment Agency, The benefits of green walls, [<a href="http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/sectors/91970.aspx" target="_blank">http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/sectors/91970.aspx</a> ]


[24] MEAa, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC


[25] Banerjee, C. (2012). Market Analysis for Terrestrial Application of Advanced Bio-Regenerative Modules: Prospects for Vertical Farming (Doctoral dissertation, Master Thesis).


[26] Despommier, D. (2009). The Vertical Farm: Reducing the impact of agriculture on ecosystem functions and services. Accessible at [<a href="http://www.verticalfarm.com/more?essay1" target="_blank">http://www.verticalfarm.com/more?essay1</a> ]


[27] Howarth, W. (2011). Diffuse water pollution and diffuse environmental laws. Journal of Environmental Law, 23(1), pp. 129–130.


[28] Tilman, D., Fargione, J., Wolff, B., D'Antonio, C., Dobson, A., Howarth, R., Shindler, D., Schlesinger, W. H., Sinberloff, D. and Swackhamer, D. (2001). Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science, 292(5515), pp. 281-284.


[29] Goodman, E. R. (2011). Aquaponics: community and economic development (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).


[30] Blidariu, F., & Grozea, A. (2011). Increasing the Economical Efficiency and Sustainability of Indoor Fish Farming by Means of Aquaponics-Review. Lucrări ştiinţifice Zootehnie şi Biotehnologii, Timişoara, 44(2).


[31] Roy, H.E., Pocock, M.J.O., Preston, C.D., Roy, D.B., Savage, J., Tweddle, J.C. & Robinson, L.D. (2012) Understanding Citizen Science & Environmental Monitoring. Final Report.


[32] BirdTrack, [<a href="http://blx1.bto.org/birdtrack/main/data-home.jsp" target="_blank">http://blx1.bto.org/birdtrack/main/data-home.jsp </a>]


[33] Concer Tree Science, Leaf Watch [<a href="http://leafwatch.naturelocator.org/" target="_blank">http://leafwatch.naturelocator.org/</a> ]


[34] Project BudBurst, [<a href="http://budburst.org/gomobile.php" target="_blank">http://budburst.org/gomobile.php</a> ]


[35] GVC Green Network Partnership, [<a href="http://www.gcvgreennetwork.gov.uk/" target="_blank">http://www.gcvgreennetwork.gov.uk</a>/ ]


[36] The Severn Project, Our Urban Farms, [<a href="http://thesevernproject.org/our-urban-farms.html" target="_blank">http://thesevernproject.org/our-urban-farms.html</a>]


[37] Easton Community Garden, [<a href="http://eastoncommunitygarden.org.uk/">http://eastoncommunitygarden.org.uk</a>/ ]


[38] The Golden Hill Community Garden, [<a href="http://thegoldenhillcommunitygarden.com/pond/">http://thegoldenhillcommunitygarden.com/pond/</a>]

[39] The Severn Project, Our Impact, [<a href="http://thesevernproject.org/our-impact.html" target="_blank">http://thesevernproject.org/our-impact.html</a> ]


[40] GLA, Urban greening, [ http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/greening-london/urban-greening ]


[41] GLA, Greening the BIDs, [<a href="http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/greening-london/urban-greening/greening-bids" target="_blank">http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/greening-london/urban-greening/greening-bid</a>s ]




[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]
[[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]

File:Rubens.jpg

2014-11-07T15:50:57Z

BRE Group: uploaded a new version of "File:Rubens.jpg"

Image courtesy of Rubens at the Palace Hotel

File:Rubens.jpg

2014-11-07T15:47:20Z

BRE Group: Image courtesy of Rubens at the Palace Hotel

Image courtesy of Rubens at the Palace Hotel

File:Bristol.jpg

2014-11-07T15:46:26Z

BRE Group: Bristol Urban Farm

Bristol Urban Farm

File:Glasgow and clyde.jpg

2014-11-07T15:44:52Z

BRE Group: Image Courtesy of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership

Image Courtesy of the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership