Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
have proliferated worldwide and their standards
compete, including, e.g., the National Green
Building Program of the National Association of
Home Builders (NAHBGreen); Green Globes of
the Green Building Initiative; and International
Green Construction Code (AIA, ASTM Int'l.).
(Swope 2007).
The third phase of the standardization life
cycle is the actual development of the standard,
essentially a design exercise through a complex
interplay among three forces: design, sense-
making, and negotiation (Mitra, et.al. 2005). This
is the DSN model which recognizes the complex
and different roles played by various participants,
such as: advocate, architect, bystander, critic,
facilitator, guru, or procrastinator (Umapathy,
et.al. 2010). During the SDO's development
process, the participants engage in: setting the
project scope, composing and making proposals
and counter-proposals constituting an anticipa-
tory design, analysis of draft standard impacts
(sense-making), negotiating revisions, coalition
building to attain consensus and final approval
through various democratic processes (e.g., vot-
ing) (Fomin, Keil, & Lyytinen 2003). In the fourth
phase, the standard is “reported out” and published,
urging adoption either implicitly or explicitly.
During the fifth phase, compliant products and
processes may be developed and produced lead-
ing to the development of markets for these
products and processes. Conformity assurance
processes (e.g., certification, monitoring, metrol-
ogy, accreditation) are developed and deployed.
For example, certification under many green
building standards involve the award of points
for siting; efficiency of design, water and materi-
als; expected energy use; indoor environmental
quality; operations and maintenance. Finally, as
technology advances, the standard is reconsidered
by evolving markets, SDOs or regulators where
pressures of alternative competitive designs is
felt. This reconsideration can force the revision
or abandonment of incumbent standards as soci-
ety's needs change and markets force the even-
tual decline of mature products compliant with
the standard in question, perhaps even the devel-
opment of superior substitutes.
CHARACTERISTICS OF STANDARDS
The compliance tolerance of standards is important
to a grounded understanding of standardization's
impact on business models for sustainability.
From this perspective, the autonomy, specific-
ity, and precision required by various standards
can differ. The variance the standard permits is
a measure of the tolerance of compliant systems
to variations inside and outside allowable limits.
This characteristic of standards is measured by
both functionality and by conformity assess-
ment. Consider how some standards permit a
wider tolerance for compliance than do other
standards. For example, a nearly infinite variety
of designs are possible for consumer electrical
devices. These devices in Japan and most of the
Western Hemisphere work well within a 10 volt
range of 110 volts to 120 volts. Some devices
continue working above or below this range (e.g.,
incandescent bulbs brighten or dim). These are
more flexible standards because they have wider
boundaries that envision a more forgiving range
of variance. By contrast, some other electrical
devices become inoperable or are damaged when
supply voltages are outside the allowable range
(e.g., florescent bulbs) illustrating that some stan-
dards require product compliance within a much
narrower tolerance range. For example, AC power
conditioners and surge protection devices may be
needed to protect personal computer equipment
from damage. The now widespread conversion of
household lighting from more voltage variance-
tolerant, but less efficient incandescent lighting
to less voltage variance-tolerant, but more energy
efficient florescent lighting illustrates the ongoing
challenges of environmental standardization. Of
course, in order to quickly achieve critical mass
