::: 首頁   資訊與服務    研究成果  
研究成果

創新綠建材評估系統與驗證制度之研究

計畫主持人: 王榮進
協同主持人: 邵文政
執行單位:
執行期程:
GPN:
ISBN:
MOIS:
組別: 環境控制組
執行方式: 協同研究
關鍵詞: 綠建材、評估指標、模糊德爾菲法、層級分析法
參考文獻:

中文摘要


一、研究緣起

我國於2004年建立綠建材標章制度,開始受理生態、健康、高性能與再生綠建材標章產品之評定認可,其透過「綠建材標章」、「綠色採購制度」與「建築技術規則」等,規範綠建材使用比例之推動,並獲得極優之績效與成果。藉由綠建材標章推動,防止品質不佳之建材,破壞生態環境與影響國人之健康,強化國內建材管制,唯有積極創新才是國家企業長期生存發展之道。

二、研究方法與過程

本研究以綠建材標章為必要之基礎認證,採用了文獻分析法以彙整國際最新建材規範之相關資料,並建立評估因子集,應用模糊德爾菲法篩選評估因子及蒐集群體意見。經由模糊德爾菲問卷篩選後,進行第二階段之層級分析法,以分析各個評估指標與評估項目之權重值,並將評估項目與各因子之權重建立後,轉換成一套具體的評分方式。

爾後為了瞭解國內產業、企業之現況及提昇國內相關之建材產業朝國際市場邁進,本計畫輔導三家廠商對國際認證或國內綠建材標章之認證輔導,除了解產業對綠建材的看法及期望,亦期能提昇建材廠商對環境永續、企業經濟成長等之效益,進而將建材推廣至國際市場。

三、重要發現

1.本研究以綠建材標章為必要之基礎認證,採用了文獻分析法以彙整國際最新「材料產品標準、規範、標章」(循環型材料、創新材料等)資料,並建立評估因子集,應用模糊德爾菲法篩選評估因子及蒐集群體意見。

2.經由問卷篩選後得出四項綠建材標章之各自評估適用之項目,得出相對較適用於現有之綠建材標章之增列項目:創新生態綠建材指標得25個項目;創新高性能綠建材指標得35個項目;創新再生綠建材指標得36個項目;創新健康綠建材指標項目得30項目。

3.層級分析法以目前市面上最多認證之健康綠建材標章為示範例,共劃分為「健康規範」、「創新發展」、「環境足跡管理」、「企業社會責任」等四大分類,評估項目共為30個細項,爾後分析各個評估指標與評估項目之權重值,並將評估項目與各因子之權重建立後,轉換成一套具體的評分方式,且提出了四項策略之方案,供未來綠建材標章之精進與修正參考依據。

4.為了瞭解國內產業、企業之現況及提昇國內相關之建材產業朝國際市場邁進,本計畫針對三家廠商進行輔導,包括國際認證或國內綠建材標章認證之輔導,於輔導廠商的部分選定了三間不同企業型態的廠商予以輔導訪談,除了解產業對綠建材的看法及期望,亦期望能提升建材廠商對環境永續、企業經濟成長等之效益。

四、主要建議事項

建議一

為推廣綠建材標章之效益,建議後續研究及推廣上,能強化精進計畫之講習會宣導或所內其他教育課程推廣之方式,以期能提昇一般民眾對綠建材系統之認知度:立即可行建議

主辦機關:內政部建築研究所

協辦機關:財團法人台灣建築中心

說明:產業創新的最終概念是組織新的產品或製程或服務推展到市場,使其創造更多更高之經濟價值,主要宗旨是為追求經濟成長,因此申請新綠建材指標,亦是為了使產品銷售量更好,目前綠建材標章認證之產品,擁有較多購買意願的為健康綠建材標章之產品,但僅因詞彙上較為商業化而提高銷售,使之產生標章認證過於集中之情形,未來將有可能發生其他認證無人申請,或無法區分各類標章之內容差異。因此建議後續研究及推廣上,能強化精進計畫之講習會宣導或所內其他教育課程推廣之方式,進階宣導各分類之綠建材內涵。一旦越多人接受、理解並認可其各類不同面向之重要性後,企業亦會有較大意願申請不同的分類項目,或進行自我提昇之目標。

建議二

本計畫之研究所面對之挑戰與建議,供後續研究者深入探討之參考:中長期建議

主辦機關:內政部建築研究所

協辦機關:無

說明:由於創新綠建材指標評分面向包含環境足跡管理與企業社會責任,於這兩個部份上,對身為代理商的企業,無法獲取生產之訊息或無法公開特定資訊之限制,建議後續研究可多調查產業中相關之代理商想法,以了解其是否有辦法達成該項目;若否,則建議指標區分上,可向綠建築之策略,劃分為當地廠商與進口代理商,使其有部分不同之評估項目與規範。目前可發現到部分指標項目過於困難,使現階段之廠商無法達成,故建議統計後,將最少人達成的環境足跡列為選擇性項目,以鼓勵性質的加分方式,使廠商可以先以達成門檻為最低目標,之後加分項目。

建議三

創新健康綠建材評估指標,是以符合國內建材產業發展現況與國際接軌之可行性而延伸出之評估標準,本研究因國內建材發展現況之限制,期未來研究能更詳盡評分準則之評分等級:中長期建議

主辦機關:內政部建築研究所

協辦機關:無

說明:本研究由於受國內建材發展現況及相關建材研究之限制,目前缺乏關於建材生產、製作與性能之分級研究結果,尚無詳盡之建材評估細項研究依據,因此本研究於「創新建綱綠建材評估指標評分準則」中之評分方式,大多數評估細項採用簡易評分法(評分0、評分3、評分5),以致相對減低其項目完成度之差異性。建議後續研究可針對評分準則之評分等級與評分數值作進階研究,經由各建材領域專家對於相關建材生產、製作與性能之分級研究,協助制定更詳盡之評分等級,並研訂更精細之評分數值,以強化各項目達到不同程度間分數的差異,提高各項目達成之辨識性。



英文摘要


(1)The Origin of Research

In 2004, Taiwan established the green building materials labeling system and began to accept the assessment of ecological, health, high-performance and recycled green building materials. It passed the "Green Building Materials Mark", "Green Procurement System" and "Building Technology Rules", etc. Standardize the use of green building materials, and obtain excellent performance and results. Promoted by the green building materials stamp to prevent poor quality building materials, damage the ecological environment and affect the health of Chinese people, strengthen domestic building materials control, only active innovation is the long-term survival and development of national enterprises.

(2)Research Methods and Processes

In this research, the Green Building Materials Mark is the necessary basic certification. The literature analysis method is adopted to collect relevant information of the latest international building materials specifications, and a set of evaluation factors is established. The fuzzy Delphi method is used to screen the evaluation factors and the opinions of the clusters. After screening through the fuzzy Delphi questionnaire, the second stage of the hierarchical analysis method is carried out to analyze the weight values of each evaluation index and the evaluation item, and the weight of the evaluation item and each factor is established, and then converted into a specific set of scoring methods.

In order to understand the current situation of domestic industries and enterprises and to upgrade the domestic related building materials industry towards the international market, the project is to assist the three manufacturers in the certification of international certification or domestic green building materials, in addition to understanding the industry's views and expectations on green building materials. In the meantime, it will enhance the benefits of building materials manufacturers for environmental sustainability, corporate economic growth, etc. And then promote building materials to the international market.

(3)Important Discovery

1.In this research, the Green Building Materials Mark is the necessary basic certification, and the literature analysis method is adopted to collect the latest “material product standards, specifications, and seals” (circular materials, innovative materials, etc.) and establish an evaluation factor set. The fuzzy Delphi method is used to screen the evaluation factors and to search for cluster opinions.

2.After screening through the questionnaire, the items of the four green building materials stamps are evaluated, and the additional items that are more suitable for the existing green building materials stamps are obtained: 25 projects of innovative ecological green building materials indicators; innovative high-performance green The building materials index has 35 projects; the innovative recycled green building materials index has 36 projects; the innovative healthy green building materials index project has 30 projects.

3.The hierarchical analysis method is based on the most certified health green building materials stamps on the market. It is divided into four categories: “health norms”, “innovation development”, “environmental footprint management” and “corporate social responsibility”. A total of 30 sub-projects, after which the weights of each evaluation index and evaluation project are analyzed, and the weights of the evaluation project and each factor are established, converted into a specific set of scoring methods, and four strategies are proposed for the future. The reference for the improvement and revision of the green building materials stamp.

4.In order to understand the current situation of domestic industries and enterprises and to improve the domestic related building materials industry towards the international market, the project is to provide guidance for three manufacturers, including international certification or domestic green building materials certification, and selected three in the coaching company. Manufacturers of different types of enterprises will provide guidance and interviews. In addition to understanding the industry's views and expectations on Green Building Materials, it is also expected to enhance the benefits of building materials manufacturers for environmental sustainability and corporate economic growth.

(4)Main Rrecommendations

Recommendation one

In order to promote the effectiveness of the green building materials stamp, it is recommended that follow-up research and promotion can strengthen the promotion plan of the project or the promotion of other educational courses in the promotion program to enhance the general public's awareness of the green building materials system: immediate feasibility suggest

Organizer: Institute of Architecture, Ministry of the Interior

Co-organizer:Taiwan Architecture & Building Center

Explanation: The ultimate concept of industrial innovation is to organize new products or processes or services to the market, so as to create more and higher economic value. The main purpose is to pursue economic growth, so the application for new green building materials indicators is also to make products. The sales volume is better. At present, the products certified by Green Building Materials are products with healthy purchase of green building materials, but they are only because of the commercialization of vocabulary, so that the certification of stamps is too concentrated. In the future, there will be no other applications for other certifications in the future, or it is impossible to distinguish the content differences of various types of labels. Therefore, it is recommended that follow-up research and promotion can strengthen the promotion of the program of the intensive project or the promotion of other educational courses in the institute, and further promote the connotation of the green building materials of each category. Once more people accept, understand and recognize the importance of their different types of orientation, companies will have a greater willingness to apply for different classification projects or to achieve self-improvement goals.

Recommendation two

The challenges and suggestions faced by the Institute of the Project are for reference by follow-up researchers: medium and long-term suggest

Organizer: Institute of Architecture, Ministry of the Interior

Co-organizer: None

Note: As the innovation green building materials index scores include environmental footprint management and corporate social responsibility, in these two parts, it is recommended that companies that are agents cannot obtain production information or cannot disclose specific information. It is possible to investigate the relevant agent ideas in the industry to see if it has a way to achieve the project; if not, it is recommended to differentiate the indicators into green building strategies, which are divided into local manufacturers and import agents to make them partially Different evaluation items and specifications. At present, some indicators can be found to be too difficult for the current stage of the manufacturer to reach. Therefore, after the statistics are recommended, the environmental footprint of at least the people will be listed as a selective project to encourage the nature of the bonus points so that the manufacturers can achieve The threshold is the minimum goal, followed by a sub-project.

Recommendation three

The evaluation index of innovative health green building materials is based on the evaluation criteria that are consistent with the feasibility of the development of the domestic building materials industry and the international integration. This study is based on the limitations of the current development of domestic building materials, and the future research can be more detailed scoring criteria: Medium and long term suggest

Organizer: Institute of Architecture, Ministry of the Interior

Co-organizer: None

Note: Due to the limitations of domestic building materials development and related building materials research, the results of grading research on building materials production, production and performance are currently lacking. There is no detailed research basis for building materials evaluation. Therefore, this study is based on “innovation”. Most of the evaluation details are based on the simple scoring method (score 0, score 3, score 5), so that the difference in the degree of completion of the project is relatively reduced. It is suggested that the follow-up study can be used for advanced research on the scoring grade and scoring value of the scoring criteria. Through the grading research on the production, production and performance of related building materials by experts in the building materials field, it is helpful to formulate more detailed scoring grades and to develop more detailed scoring. The numerical value is used to enhance the difference in scores between different projects and to improve the recognition of each project.