Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 439

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and roles

Cole, Raymond J.·2005·Building Research & Information

Abstract

The initial intentions and current emphasis of building environmental performance assessment methods are compared and contrasted with their emerging roles. This analysis provides a starting point for anticipating future developments in environmental assessment methods for buildings, how they are likely to evolve and how they will be used. The current varying expectations of assessment methods are examined, including the extent to which they can address complex issues while remaining simple and practical, their role as ‘market transformation tools', and their ability to enhance dialogue among a range of stakeholders broader than a design team. More importantly, the increasing framing of environmental issues within the wider context of ‘sustainability’ raises the question about whether existing methods are capable of being easily reconfigured to fulfil this new agenda.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09613210500219063

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 439

Metadata

Authors
Cole, R. J.
Venue
Building Research & Information
Published
2005-09-01
Volume
33
Issue
5
Pages
455-467
ISSN
  • 0961-3218 (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-4321
OpenAlex
W2019725033
Cited by
439
References
0
FWCI
35.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and roles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/09613210500219063
The paper
Cole, R. J. (2005). Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and roles. Building Research & Information. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210500219063

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.