See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/285970302

Developments in performance-based building codes and standards

Article in Forest Products Journal · July 2000

CITATIONS READS
123 5,606

1 author:

Greg C. Foliente
University of Melbourne
143 PUBLICATIONS 2,728 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Greg C. Foliente on 26 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

F E A T U R E
Developments in
Performance-Based
Building Codes
and Standards

A prescriptive approach describes an acceptable

solution while a performance approach describes
the required performance. In order to clarify the dif-
In the past, most ference between these two approaches, it will be
helpful to use an example. Consider the goal of fire
building codes and safety in a building. In order to achieve this goal, a
prescriptive code would specify what materials the
standards have structural frame of the building should be or should
used prescriptive not be made of. Whereas a performance-based
code might state that the building structure should
(or compliance) be able to withstand a fire long enough for the
occupants to escape safely, but would not “pre-
criteria. In recent scribe” exactly what materials must be or must not
years, there has be used. Therefore, if it can be demonstrated that a
given set of materials would achieve the goal of fire
been strong safety, those materials would be accepted under a
performance-based code.
interest worldwide Prescriptive criteria are straightforward for a
in developing builder or designer to follow, easy for a third party to
check, and relatively easy for building regulators to
codes and stan- enforce. However, there are some fundamental diffi-
culties associated with the use of prescriptive crite-
dards that are ria and these problems have increased the interest
more performance in the development of performance-based codes
and standards.
based. The most serious problem with the prescriptive
approach is that it serves as a barrier to innovation.
Improved and/or cheaper products may be devel-
oped, yet their use might not be allowed if con-
struction is governed by prescriptive codes and
By Greg C. Foliente standards. One example of this is the development
of base isolation systems that protect buildings
The author is Project Leader from expensive and life-threatening damages dur-
and Principal Research Scientist, ing earthquakes. Widespread application and
CSIRO Building, Construction adoption of these systems soon after they were first
and Engineering, Melbourne, developed in the 1960s would have saved many
Australia; and also the lives and reduced economic damages from earth-
Coordinator of the CIB Proactive quakes. But prescriptive code requirements ham-
Program on Performance Based pered and greatly delayed their adoption. With a
Building; greg.foliente@
dbce.csiro.au.
MONTH YEAR
performance-based code, these systems would have rather than prescribing how it is to be constructed. This
been allowed for much sooner. concept as applied to building and construction is not
Another problem with the prescriptive approach is new; its development has been discussed in an article by
that it makes it very difficult to cost-optimize building Gross (14).
construction. For example, in the prescriptive approach, a The first known building regulation record has been
specific set of framing and construction details for hous- attributed to King Hammurabi, who reigned in
es in a high-wind region would be required. This pre- Babylonia from about 1955 to 1913 B.C. It contained a
scriptive solution would “imply” a certain level of perfor- performance statement on structural safety. Upon an
mance, but this is not explicitly or quantitatively stated. obelisk in the Louvre in Paris is inscribed a quote from
Thus, it would take a tremendous amount of work to the Hammurabi Code:
demonstrate that another solution (e.g., a framing system “Article 229: The builder has built a house for a man
with fewer members but with innovative configuration and his work is not strong and if the house he has built
and connections) would equal this unspecified perfor- falls in and kills a householder, that builder shall be slain.”
mance level. In contrast, a performance-based code This statement does not say anything about the ways
would have a clear and quantified description of required and means of buildings, e.g., the type of material, the
performance, ideally in terms of risk. This would allow the thickness, dimension, and size of building parts, or the
use of newer, and possibly less expensive, products or method of construction, but it clearly states the required
processes that can be shown to meet or exceed the end result: that the building should not collapse and kill
code’s acceptable level of risk. Design tools can then be someone.
developed to balance cost and risk (17).
A third problem is related to interna-
tional trade in building products. If two
trading countries each use their own
prescriptive criteria, it is often difficult to
establish the equivalence between the The performance approach is,
two sets of criteria and to show that one
country’s accepted solution would equal
the implied performance level required
in essence, the practice of
in the other country. Thus, it is difficult to
establish fair trading agreements with thinking and working in terms
the prescriptive approach.
Recognizing that prescriptive codes
and standards are major non-tariff trade
of ends rather than means
barriers that inhibit trade, the World
Trade Organization (WTO) has stated in
Clause 2.8 of the Agreement on
Technical Barriers to Trade (25):
“Wherever appropriate, Members shall specify techni- In 1925, the U.S. National Bureau of Standards, the
cal regulations based on product requirements in terms predecessor of the National Institute of Standards and
of performance rather than design or descriptive charac- Technology (NIST), published a report titled
teristics.” (italics supplied). Recommended Practice for Arrangement of Building
Member economies that are signatories to the WTO Codes (19), which states:
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) have “Whenever possible, requirements should be stated in
therefore committed themselves, knowingly or not, to the terms of performance, based upon test results for service
use of performance requirements in evaluating a prod- conditions, rather than in dimensions, detailed methods,
uct’s fitness for purpose and in accepting new and/or or specific materials. Otherwise, new materials, or new
innovative products in their market, or, in other words, to assemblies of common materials, which would meet
use the language of performance in trade. construction demands satisfactorily and economically,
might be restricted from use, thus, obstructing progress
The Performance Approach in the industry.”
This statement is as true today as it was then.
In the late 1960s, the U.S. Department of Housing
Historical Background and Urban Development sponsored a large program
The performance approach is, in essence, the practice called “Operation Breakthrough” to develop criteria for
of thinking and working in terms of ends rather than design and evaluation of innovative housing systems.
means (5). The performance approach is concerned with This led to the publication of a performance criteria
what a building or building product is required to do, resource document (20).

FOREST PRODUCTS JOURNAL Vol. XX, No. XX 3

 PRESCRIPTIVE
fied, and procured, resulting in a
building with an implicit set of
attributes (Fig. 1a). In the perfor-
PAR TS
PARTS (a) mance approach, the building attrib-
utes are described and specified,
A
and many combinations of different
T building parts can be procured for
T
R which it can be demonstrated that
I the specified attributes will be pro-
B vided (Fig. 1b).
U
T This focus on attributes enlarges
E PARTS
PA R TS the field of building technology to
S
PARTS
PAR TS include whole new areas of
PARTS
PA R TS research. Since human require-
PARTS
PAR TS ments are the defining parameters
for the building attributes, their
P A
E T proper definition are required in the
R T development of performance crite-
F R
O I ria. This process must include
(b) R B research on human response to the
M U
A T built environment, which covers
N E areas of physiology, psychology,
C S
E sociology, anthropology, ergonom-
ics, and special populations (such as
geriatrics and the disabled) (15).
FIGURE 1. Quantifying these criteria requires
A matrix of parts and attributes: (a) Prescriptive; and the application of uncertainty mod-
(b) Performance approach (from ref. (15)). elling and probabilistic methods (9-
11). This is necessary if multiple per-
Developments in the last couple of decades can be formance levels are to be developed. The example of a
found in the proceedings of the series of conferences floor system might help to clarify this. The design of a
sponsored jointly by the International Council for floor system must certainly insure that the floor will
Research and Innovation in Building and Construction support the required loads. But beyond that, floor
(CIB), the American Society for Testing and Materials deflection and vibration must be considered. Research
(ASTM), and the International Union of Testing and on human response to floor vibrations can help devel-
Research Laboratories for Materials and Structures op various levels of acceptable vibration, e.g., level 1
(RILEM). A conference was held in Philadelphia in 1972 might be that 75 percent of humans would find this
(12), Lisbon in 1982 (18), and Tel Aviv in 1996 (3). The level of vibration acceptable 90 percent of the time; and
group of sponsoring organizations was joined by the level 2 might be that 90 percent of humans would be
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in satisfied 90 percent of the time, etc. Building designers
the Tel Aviv conference. Other helpful publications and their clients would then have a choice regarding
include those from CIB (5-8), the proceedings of a work- the floor performance level they wished to accept, con-
shop in Tsukuba, Japan, on performance-based structur- sidering the combination of the clients’ expectations for
al design standards (4), and the proceedings of the comfort and their willingness to pay for that level of
International Conference on Performance-Based Codes comfort. In the performance approach, the building
and Fire Safety Design Methods (22). clients or users can choose the balance of performance
Most recently, the major research and development and cost they are willing to accept.
activities that are still needed to better implement the
concept have been identified (2,11). CIB has developed a Performance and Prescription Mix
Proactive Program on Performance-Based Building. Most design briefs agreed between building own-
ers/clients and designers are a mixture of prescriptive
Paradigm Shift: From Parts to Attributes and performance specifications. The more performance-
If a building is viewed as a matrix of parts and attrib- oriented the specification is, the more freedom the
utes, the main difference between the traditional pre- designers have to provide alternative solutions or prod-
scriptive approach and the performance approach can ucts (Fig. 2 and Table 1). A lower-level specification is
be illustrated as shown in Figure 1 (15). In the prescrip- more prescriptive and constraining. But the higher the
tive approach, the building parts are described, speci- level of specification in terms of performance, the more

4 MONTH YEAR
TABLE 1. Sample specification of a door (from ref. (21)).

Level Performance/Prescriptive Mix Specification Text

1 Fully prescriptive Provide Door Cat. No. 123 from
Fantastic Door Company

2 Prescriptive with some Provide timber rectangular door 1800 x 800 x 40 mm

performance criteria with dead lock capable of resisting a
horizontal force of 2 kN.

3 Performance with some Provide lockable 1800 x 800 door capable of

prescriptive criteria resisting intruder with crow bar

4 As a sub-system with performance Provide controlled access to fit 1800 x 800

and interface requirements opening in wall with appropriate security measure.
5 As a sub-system with performance Provide controlled access suitable for average
requirements only Sumo wrestlers with appropriate
security measures.

6 As part of a total system in risk- Provide controlled access for Ali Baba and
based performance terms the 40 thieves that 90% of the occupants
will be happy with.

difficult it is to find a universally acceptable method for through 1) actual testing; 2) calculation (e.g., use of a
the verification of performance (21). computational procedure or mathematical model to
show that the required performance will be achieved); or
Verification 3) a combination of testing and calculation. Preparation
Verification is an important component of the perfor- of supporting data from testing and/or calculation can
mance-based approach because it will be necessary to be done in-house or out-sourced by the company to a
demonstrate that a particular material or building solu- third-party testing agency or consulting company. Either
tion will meet a given performance criteria. In most reg- way, building officials, who make the final decision
ulatory systems, the company responsible for developing whether the product is satisfactory or not, typically
and marketing a new product is also responsible for require another third-party check or certification that the
demonstrating that this product meets the performance verification method employed by the company or its con-
requirement for its intended use. Verification can be sultants is an appropriate method of verification.

Specification
Level

6 As part of a total system in risk-based performance terms

5 As a sub-system with performance requirements only

4 As a sub-system with performance and interface requirements

3 Performance with some prescriptive criteria

Prescriptive Designer’s
Content Freedom

2 Prescriptive with some performance criteria

1 Fully prescriptive.
0 Prescriptive Content 100%
100% Performance Content 0

FIGURE 2.
Levels of specification with different performance-prescriptive mixes (from ref. (21)).

FOREST PRODUCTS JOURNAL Vol. XX, No. XX 5

 T
UC

lio
tfo
OD
Codes & Standards

r
Po
PR

g
in
Set user needs Evaluate

ild
Bu
and target building
performance performance

....
KNOWLEDGE / TECHNOLOGY

g
in
ild
Bu
....

le
ho
W
Guidelines

.... ....

m
Initiation Definition Design Build Occupancy

te
s
Sy
b-
Su PROCESS
....
Applied

t
en
m
Ele
le
ng
Si

Design for target

Basic

performance

FIGURE 3.
The scope and dimensions of the performance concept and its applications to buildings.
General Applications mance criteria for floor deflection and vibration; and 3)
evaluate the performance of an existing floor system as
The performance-based approach is applicable to: part of a performance review or audit.
• building production (from project initiation to
occupancy; see “Process” in Fig. 3); Regulations vs. Standards
• building quality control (regulation; see “Product”
To facilitate world trade, internationalization of perfor-
in Fig. 3).
mance-based standards is needed. This is possible only
In the case of building production, the freedom if a distinction is made between “standards” and “regu-
encouraged in preparing the design brief and in the lations,” and if their relationship is clarified. The impor-
actual design and construction leads to more innovative, tance of this is often overlooked or taken for granted.
economical, and better-performing buildings. In the case Some countries have a building regulatory structure that
of regulation, the performance concept allows innovative makes it difficult to separate the two, but in most coun-
and cost-optimized construction while at the same time tries a distinction between them can be made.
protecting the safety, health, and general welfare of In this article, a building code or regulation is defined
building inhabitants (14). as a document used by a local, state, or national govern-
Critical to the development, support, and implementa- ment body to control building practice through a set of
tion of the performance concept in both building pro- statements of “acceptable” minimum requirements. This
duction and building regulation is the availability of is typically a legal document. Since the acceptable
building performance models that can be used to 1) requirements are usually established based on socio-
develop quantified performance criteria for building political and/or community considerations, they naturally
codes and standards; 2) design a building or its parts to differ from country to country or from locality to locality.
a target performance; and 3) evaluate or verify the per- Building standards, on the other hand, are essentially
formance of specific buildings (or products) in service. technical documents that standardize, generally in terms
For example, a structural analysis model for a floor sys- of quality or performance, but sometimes in terms of size
tem could be used to 1) develop quantified performance or procedure, some activity in relation to building con-
criteria regarding acceptable floor deflection and vibra- struction (24). They serve as some kind of benchmark.
tion, in conjunction with human response studies; 2) There are different levels and types of building standards
design a new floor system to meet the stated perfor- (e.g., product, design, workmanship, etc.)

6 MONTH YEAR
TABLE 2. The Nordic Five Level System.

Level Basic Heading Description /Comments

1 GOAL The goal addresses the essential interests of the
community at large with respect to the built environment,
and/or the needs of the user-consumer.

2 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENT Building or building element specific requirements.

A functional requirement addresses one specific aspect
or required performance of the building to achieve the
stated goal (note that other functional requirements
may contribute to achieving the same goal).

3 OPERATIVE REQUIREMENT Actual requirement, in terms of performance criteria or

expanded functional description. This is also some
times referred to as PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT.

4 VERIFICATION Instructions or guidelines for verification of perfor

mance.

5 EXAMPLES OF ACCEPTABLE Supplements to the regulations with examples of

SOLUTIONS solutionsdeemed to satisfy the requirements.

When building regulations cover technical aspects of is also now beginning to use standards in rating build-
performance, they typically incorporate or refer to rele- ings in countries like this for catastrophe insurance (24).
vant standards. Thus, building regulations are a user of
standards. But this is not the sole purpose of standards; Basic Regulatory Framework
they have other uses. For example, in countries that have and Contents
low levels of regulation, those who contract with a
builder for construction of a building might ask the Most performance-based regulatory frameworks are
builder to use relevant standards as assurance that the variations of what is known as the Nordic Five Level
building will perform as needed. The insurance industry System (8) (Table 2). In this system, Level 1 (GOAL)
addresses the essential interests of the community at
large and/or the needs of the user-consumer. Level 2
(FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENT) addresses one specif-
Level 1 G OA L / O BJ E CT I V E
ic aspect of the building or a building element to
achieve the stated goal. Level 3 (OPERATIVE or PER-
FORMANCE REQUIREMENT) specifies the actual
Level 2 F U N CT I O N A L R E Q U I R E M E N T S requirement to be satisfied. Levels 4 (VERIFICA-
TION) and 5 (EXAMPLES OF ACCEPTABLE
SOLUTIONS) deal with the specifics of meeting
the goal. The last two levels are sometimes
Level 3 PE R FOR MANCE R EQU I R E M E NTS combined because compliance to a given
prescriptive solution (Level 5) is just one of
several possible methods of verification
V E R I F I CATI O N M ETH O D S (Level 4), as shown in Figure 4. The
Level 4
Building Code of Australia (1) has a four-
level framework similar to that shown in
By prescriptive By By By combined testing Figure 4.
provisions check testing calculation and calculation Ideally, a performance-based
code would also contain a commen-
tary section, which helps clarify the
Prescriptive method Performance based methods interpretation and application of per-
formance-based provisions. The
commentary section explains the
FIGURE 4. basis for each performance criterion
and its evaluation or verification.
General four-level regulatory framework (from ref. (11)).

FOREST PRODUCTS JOURNAL Vol. XX, No. XX 7

 Performance Matrix and Criteria and criteria still need to be developed to support a more
complete performance-based code.
A building can be described as a Performance Matrix Performance Criteria means a statement of the oper-
of parts and attributes; an example is shown in Figure 5. ative or performance requirement. As stated in an earli-
Not shown in the matrix is a third dimension, which is the er example, the performance criteria for a floor system
type or class of building (e.g., residential, commercial, will include the following: 1) it will have sufficient
industrial, etc.). Ideally, functional and performance strength to support the anticipated load in the lifetime of
statements, and performance criteria for each cell or the structure (i.e., structural safety, marked X in Fig. 5);
group of cells in the Performance Matrix would already 2) it will not sag or vibrate so much that it annoys or
be available for all classes of buildings and could be brings discomfort to occupants (i.e., structural service-
included in the matrix. But current performance-based ability, marked Y in Fig. 5); and 3) other performance
building codes that are in use in some countries do not statements related to fire safety, acoustics, thermal com-
contain a complete set of functional and performance fort, etc. The performance statements on structural safe-
requirements. For example, the level of understanding of ty and serviceability are further given in quantified terms
the “durability” of structural materials in a building is not in the form of a set of equations. For safety, the bending
yet as developed as it is for “structural and fire safety” and shear strength of the floor joists should be larger
performance. We should also remember that currently than the anticipated load, and for serviceability, there
most performance statements are a combination of per- could be limits set on the deflection of individual joists
formance and prescription (e.g., Fig. 2). Thus, the matrix or the whole floor system, and on the acceptable vibra-
may serve as a guide on what performance statements tion of the floor system.

PRODUCTS/PARTS
WHOLE BUILDING
SPACE
Functional Space
Building Envelope Space
STRUCTURE
Sub-Structure
Super-Structure X Y
EXTERNAL ENCLOSURE
Below Ground
Above Ground
Vertical
Horizontal
Inclined

INTERNAL ENCLOSURE
Vertical
Horizontal X Y
Inclined
SERVICES
Plumbing (Water and waste)
Heating, Ventilation and AirCon
Fuel system
Electrical system
Communication system
Mechanical transport
Security and protection
Fittings
Environmental Friendliness
Tightness (Water and Air)
Accident (Safety in Use)

Structural Serviceability

Health and Hygiene

SUSTAINABILITY – LCP
Thermal Comfort
ATTRIBUTES

Maintainability

Decommission
Condensation

Adaptability
Functionality
Air Quality
HABITABILITY

Economic
Aesthetic
Structural

Durability
Acoustic
Lighting

Security
Access
SAFETY

Fire

FIGURE 5.
An example of a building performance matrix (from ref. (11)).

8 MONTH YEAR
 In the Inter-jurisdictional Regulatory Collaboration mote international understanding of each other’s regula-
Committee (IRCC) Guidelines for the Introduction of tory framework and practices. Some of these issues have
Performance-Based Building Regulations (Discussion been discussed and published in two important docu-
Paper) (16), two types of performance criteria are identi- ments:
fied: technology-based performance criteria and risk-
• CIB Publication 206: Final Report of CIB Task Group
based performance criteria.
11 Performance-Based Building Codes (8);
Technology-based performance criteria are primarily
• Guidelines for the Introduction of Performance-Based
concerned with the characteristics of a product under
Building Regulations (Discussion Paper) (16).
well-defined conditions, such as in tests or in design
specifications where performance is measured or evalu- Although ISO does not deal with building codes and
ated in terms of physical parameters. Risk-based crite- regulations but only with technical standards, it is worth
ria, on the other hand, are primarily
concerned with the behavior of a
product in use, where performance is
measured in terms of the reliability of
the product to perform as expected.
Using the floor system example to
Much further work is needed to
illustrate, setting a maximum allow-
able deflection for a floor system develop the background risk-
under 1 kN load at the center of the
floor or a minimum system frequency
for the floor system is a technology-
based criteria needed to underpin
based performance criterion; whereas
setting the percentage of people who technology-based criteria.
are satisfied with a particular level of
floor vibration is a risk-based perfor-
mance criterion. Ideally, technology-
based criteria should be derived from
target risk-based criteria. But this is currently not the mentioning here that there are various ISO standards
case; in housing, all available performance criteria are that deal with the performance of building systems and
currently technology-based (21). Much further work is components. The ISO Technical Sub-Committee TC
needed to develop the background risk-based criteria 59/SC 15 is currently actively developing a set of perfor-
needed to underpin technology-based criteria. mance criteria for single-family attached and detached
dwellings.
Current Codes and Standards
International Developments
In 1994, the model building code organizations in the
United States formed a new national organization called The three most active professional areas in the devel-
the International Code Council (ICC) to develop a single opment and implementation of performance-based
building code for the United States. The ICC Performance building codes and standards are 1) structural engineer-
Code for Buildings and Facilities is scheduled for publica- ing; 2) fire safety engineering; and 3) the
tion later this year and will be available for Internet building project initiation and construction process.
download at www.intlcode.org. A similar effort is under- In structural engineering, the push towards perfor-
way in Canada, where it is called an objective-based mance-based design is strongly motivated, not by trade,
building code; this is scheduled for publication in 2003. but primarily by the desire of the engineering profession
The European Commission (EC) has developed the ECE to: 1) couple the performance, expectations, and design
Compendium of Model Provisions for Building Regulations requirements more closely than is possible in a prescrip-
(23) to provide guidance to EC countries that would like tive code; and 2) ensure that natural hazard loads (from
to develop performance-based codes. wind and earthquake events) are treated consistently
Several countries have already put in place perfor- and that design conservatism is appropriate to required
mance-based building codes, and some are in the function (9). The former is driven by expectations by
process of developing them. Representatives from some building clients and their insurers that designers can
of these countries formed the IRCC to 1) discuss practi- design for different levels of performance based on dif-
cal issues related to performance-based code develop- ferent levels of damage in the event of a natural disaster.
ment, support, and implementation (including the Both clients and their insurers do not want a repeat of
required social, political, and legal issues); and 2) pro- the extent and cost of damage caused by the 1994

FOREST PRODUCTS JOURNAL Vol. XX, No. XX 9

Northridge Earthquake in Southern California and other In addition to the website, there is also an FTP site
recent natural disasters. It would be helpful to be able to (ftp.mel.dbce.csiro.au) and an e-mail discussion list
alert the building owners that a certain level of damage ([email protected]) dedicated to the CIB
might be sustained with a particular design, and then the Proactive Program.
owners could choose to build to that level, or to a higher
level (at increased cost) to sustain less damage. The Issues and Challenges
important thing is that building clients have a choice
regarding the balance of performance and cost they are The future of building codes and standards points
willing to accept. toward a performance-based approach, which frees the
IRCC, ISO, and CIB are very active in building regu- building regulatory system from the limitations of the
latory issues, development and drafting of technical current prescriptive approach. Performance-based codes
standards, and technology development, respectively. and standards are useful for:
The CIB Proactive Program on Performance-Based • promoting innovation;
Building covers all aspects of the construction process, • cost-optimizing construction;
from project initiation and construction through the • facilitating international trade.
entire life cycle of the building. CSIRO has developed a The performance approach provides a communica-
website supplement to the information regarding the tions interface between building professionals and the
Proactive Program already given in the CIB website public (10). The building clients or owners have the
(www.cibworld.nl/pages/begin/Pro3.html). The CSIRO option to choose the balance of performance and cost
website supplement can be found at www.cibpro- they are willing to accept. Because meeting user needs
gram.dbce.csiro.au. and requirements are paramount in the performance
Together, the interlinked CIB and CSIRO websites approach, this will result in more satisfied building occu-
provide all the important information regarding the CIB pants and owners.
Proactive Program. The CSIRO website provides detailed Practical developments on this topic will likely drive
information about the three priority tasks that have been process, product, and marketing changes in parts of the
selected by the CIB Program Committee: forest products industry that have a stake in the building
and construction industry. This was repeatedly men-
• Task 1: Development of a compendium of building tioned in a 1998 research needs workshop on wood
performance models; engineering in the 21st century (13).
• Task 2: Preparation of a report on economic benefits; Various countries currently have different stages of
• Task 3: Development of pre-standardization docu- development, and different degrees of adoption and
ments. implementation of the performance concept in building
procurement, design, construction, and evaluation.
Task 1 is the number one priority. The final product will Countries or localities that have been using performance-
be a hardcopy publication and/or CD-Rom for general based codes cite many benefits derived from their use.
distribution in early 2002. The compendium outline is But before different stakeholders in the industry can
shown on the website and a compendium survey form is enjoy the full benefits of the performance approach in
available for downloading as an MSWord file. An on-line building design and construction, much research and
survey form is also available. development work still needs to be done (2,11,16).

Literature Cited Vol. 1. Key papers. CIB, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

7. __________. 1993. Some examples of the application of the
1. Australian Building Codes Board. 1996. Building Code of performance concept in building. Publication 157, W60 Working
Australia, Vols. 1 and 2. ABCB, Canberra, Australia. Commission. CIB, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
2. Becker, R. 1999. Research and development needs for better 8. __________. 1997. Final report of CIB task group 11,
implementation of the performance concept in building. Performance-based building codes. Report of Working
Automation in Construction 8(4): 525-532. Commission TG11, Publication 206. CIB, Rotterdam, The
3. __________ and M. Paciuk (eds). 1996. Applications of the Netherlands.
Performance Concept in Building. Proc 3rd CIB-ASTM-ISO-RILEM 9. Ellingwood, B.R. 1998. Reliability-based performance concept
Inter. Symp. Vol. 1 and 2. National Building Research Institute, for building construction. Structural Engineering World Wide. Paper
Haifa, Israel. T178-4 (CD-Rom). Elsevier Science Ltd., New York.
4. Building Research Institute. 1997. Proc. Inter. Workshop on 10. __________. 2000. Performance-based design: structural
Harmonization of Performance-Based Building Structural Design in reliability considerations. Proc. 2000 Structures Congress (CD-
Countries Surrounding the Pacific Ocean. BRI, Tsukuba, Japan. Rom). Am. Soc. of Civil Engineers, Reston, Va.
5. CIB. 1982. Working with the performance approach to build- 11. Foliente, G.C., R.H. Leicester, and L. Pham. 1998.
ing. Report of Working Commission W60, Publication 64, CIB, Development of the CIB proactive program on performance based
Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 30 pp. building codes and standards. BCE Doc 98/232. CSIRO Building,
6. __________. 1988. Performance requirements in buildings. Construction, and Engineering, Highett, Australia.
12. Foster, B.E. (ed.). 1972. Performance concept in buildings -

10 MONTH YEAR
 Invited papers, Joint RILEM-ASTM-CIB Symposium Proc. NBS for arrangement of building codes. NBS, U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
Special Publication 361, Vol. 1 and 2. U.S. Govt. Printing Office, U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Washington D.C. 20. __________. 1977. Performance criteria resource document
13. Fridley, K. 1998. Wood Engineering in the 21st Century: for innovative construction. NBSIR 77-1316, Office of Housing and
Research Needs and Goals. Am. Soc. of Civil Engineers, Reston, Va. Building Technology, NBS, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, U.S. Gov.
14. Gross, J.G. 1996. Developments in the application of the per- Printing Office, Washington D.C.
formance concept in building. In: Proc. 3rd CIB-ASTM-ISO-RILEM 21. Pham, L. and P.J. Boxhall. 1999. Structural performance cri-
Inter. Symp. R. Becker and M. Paciuk, eds. Vol. 1. National Building teria concerning housing in Australia and Japan - Summary of pro-
Research Institute, Haifa, Israel. ject findings (1996-1999). BCE Doc 99/072, CSIRO Building,
15. Hattis, D. 1996. Role and significance of human require- Construction, and Engineering, Highett, Australia.
ments and architecture in application of the performance concept 22. Society of Fire Protection Engineers. 2000. Proc. 3rd Inter.
in building. In: Proc. 3rd CIB-ASTM-ISO-RILEM Inter. Symp. R. Conf. on Performance-Based Codes and Fire Safety Design
Becker. and M. Paciuk, eds. Vol. 1. National Building Research Methods. SFPE, Bethesda, Md.
Institute, Haifa, Israel. 23. United Nations. 1996. ECE compendium of model provisions
16. IRCC. 1998. Guidelines for the introduction of performance- for building regulations - Buildings. ECE/HBP/81/Rev.1. Economic
based building regulations (discussion paper). The Inter-jurisdic- Commission for Europe, United Nations, New York and Geneva.
tional Regulatory Collaboration Committee, Secretariat, Canberra, 72 pp.
Australia. 143 pp. 24. Walker, G.R. 1997. Internationalisation of housing standards.
17. Leicester, R.H. 1984. Closed form solutions for cost-optimised Proc. 1997 International Building Construction Standards
reliability. Proc. IUTAM Symposium on Probabilistic Methods in the Conference/Workshop. Dept. of Industry Science and Tourism,
Mechanics of Solids and Structures, Stockholm, Sweden. Canberra, Australia. pp. 102-108.
18. LNEC. 1982. Performance concept in building. Proc. 3rd 25. World Trade Organization. 1997. First Triennial Review of the
ASTM/CIB/RILEM Symp. Vol. 1 and 2. Laboratorio Nacional de Operation and Implementation of the Agreement on Technical
Engenharia Civil, Lisbon, Portugal. Barriers to Trade, Document G/TBT/5 Attachment, Committee on
19. National Bureau of Standards. 1925. Recommended practice Technical Barriers to Trade, WTO, Geneva, Switzerland.

FOREST PRODUCTS JOURNAL Vol. XX, No. XX 11

View publication stats