15/09/2011
Facilitating access to insurance by self-employed builders and small building firms so as to stimulate innovation and the promotion of eco-technologies in the European Union
N°16/PP/ENT/ASS/11/611
Open procedure, 2011/S 141-233384
(OJ/S S141 of 26.07.2011)
CONTENTS Project summary ...... 3
1. General context and evolution of the building industry ...... 3
2. Background to tender invitation ...... 6
3. Understanding of the requirements ...... 9
3.1. Context ...... 9
3.2. General approach ...... 10
Data on quality/conformity marks ...... 11
Data on pathology ...... 12
3.3. Place of insurance in Europe ...... 14
4. General Methodology ...... 15
4.1. Definition of criterion and assessment of their level of pertinence in terms of quality/conformity marks and inventory of information on existing pathology and their assessment in the insurance sector ...... 15
4.2. Collect and contact with the parties involved in the pilot project ...... 16
4.3. Modalities for collecting information and the establishment of an inventory ...... 16
5. Links with previous activities ...... 17
6. Project management ...... 23
6.1. Coordination tasks ...... 23
6.2. Management organisation and tasks ...... 24
6.3. The scientific committee ...... 24
1 15/09/2011
6.4. Risk assessment ...... 25
7. Level of involvement and activity of other stakeholders ...... 27
8. Team proposed for implementation of the contract ...... 34
8.1. List of participants ...... 35
Relevant skills ...... 47
Language capabilities and regional presence...... Erreur ! Signet non défini.
Reference projects ...... Erreur ! Signet non défini.
8.2. Organisation chart ...... 54
9. A plan of action with description of activities and their timing ...... 55
9.1. Work package list ...... 55
9.2. Work planning and timetable ...... 58
9.3. Deliverables list ...... Erreur ! Signet non défini.
9.4. Work package descriptions ...... 61
2 15/09/2011
Project summary
1. General context and specificities of the building industry Any investor in a building project expects the delivery of a flawless building. The record of building defects shows that this ideal situation is rarely, if ever, met. The reasons why this ideal situation is very difficult to achieve have various origins which are not all construction–specific. A general reason is called information asymmetry by economists: within the frame of economic transactions, this concept reflects the fact that one person (agent) has more information than the other (principal).
In addition to the problem of asymmetry of information between construction professionals and clients, there is also a question of possible asymmetry of information in the following lines:
- between construction professionals and insurers, - information in the framework of cross-border activities, - Information about quality marks and construction pathology which is not adequately diffused and in general not readily available for all market stakeholders.
These general considerations must be considered with regard to more construction-specific reasons. Vrijhoef and al. (2001) have shown that many problems in the construction process originated at the interfaces of different parties (see after). Construction is a project-based industry, not a mass- production industry. As such, the construction supply-chain involves many economic actors (client(s), architects, technical designers, contractors, product suppliers, advisers, controllers ...) for a rather short period of time (typically a couple of years). During this short period, the majority of these actors will temporarily work together on project-specific tasks. Most of these actors never worked together before the construction operation and will never work again together for other construction projects. This is not a favourable context for the exchange of information.
3 15/09/2011
- Difficulties finding out client’s wishes - Incorrect documents - Inaccurate data - Inaccurate data - Changes of clients wishes - Design changes - Engineering drawings - Information needs are not - Long procedures to discuss - Extended wait for architect’s not fit for use met changes approval of design changes - Adversarial bargaining - Order changes
Purchasing& Client Design Engineering preparation
- Inaccurate data - Information needs are not Suppliers met - Unrealistic planning
Completion Occupation Site Subcontractors of building
- Deliveries not according to Subcontracted work - Unresolved quality planning Problematic not delivered problems - Wrong and defective deliveries completion due to according to main - Delayed occupation due to - Long storage period quality problems design, contract and late completion - Awkward packing planning Large shipments
Source : Vrijhoef, Koskela et Howell (2001)
Moreover, the great majority of these actors (particularly architects offices, contractors and most of suppliers) are SMEs and very often VSMEs which cannot have the same capacity to access information than bigger economic actors. For contracting companies, these facts are reflected by the statistics of the European Construction Industry Federation (FIEC, www.fiec.eu):
3 million enterprises (EU-27), of which . 95% are SMEs with fewer than 20 and . 93% with fewer than 10 operatives 14,9 million operatives : . 7,1 % of Europe`s total employment . 29,1 % of industrial employment
The differences between predominant construction techniques also have to be acknowledged to better describe the context of building construction in EU-27. Building production is an age-old human activity. Until the middle of the XXth century and still now to a significant extent, mainly traditional construction techniques have been used to build buildings. These traditional techniques were developed centuries ago from locally available resources (stone, clay, wood ...). Even if any construction project in any EU-27 country is organised in similar main sequences (programme, project, erection, operation), differences do exist in the relations between actors.
4 15/09/2011
These differences reflect the local culture of the concerned human groups: access to the construction professions, products supply chains, location and nature of control during the construction operation vary from country to country. Though it is very traditional and local (it mainly remains local in each of the EU-27 countries) in essence, the construction sector is open to innovations. Very recently (within the last 100 years) innovations (reinforced concrete, elevators, air conditioner, plaster-board, float-glass ...) were introduced on the construction market. Unprecedented buildings were erected using these techniques (skyscrapers, cold storage buildings, flexible office buildings ...). This deeply changed the traditional context from several points of view: level of investments (complex buildings), required skills (design, implementation), risk assessment (newly introduced techniques do not benefit the experience of the past), maintenance (sophisticated integrated technical systems). The on-going introduction of smart IT tools opens new perspectives and further changes in the construction process. More recently, the priority given to sustainable construction and the growing demand of customers for “performance guarantees” of high energy-performance buildings brings new challenges that will modify the relations between actors. These evolutions reinforce the complexity of the building construction production system. The resulting potential increase of building defects has for several decades been addressed. For instance, on-going long-term processes such as the European standardisation aim to favour a better understanding and communication between involved parties. The pre-normative work which is carried out by EOTA and UEAtc or certification bodies also contributes to this positive evolution. Nevertheless, a lot has still to be done to assure the quality of construction in the EU-27 countries. The cost of “non-quality” (i.e. the cost resulting from direct building defects) is said to be around 10% of the annual turnover of the construction activity. (Source : http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=840212&show=pdf).
The insurance sector is naturally one of the most concerned stakeholders when it comes to information about construction quality. This information is vital for the insurers in order to assess the risk and to determine appropriate pricing of insurance cover. For many insurers and reinsurers the answer to the question whether a given construction risk is acceptable or not depends in a large part on availability of reliable information and feedback of experience with respect to a given category of risk. Thus, it is not surprising that some insurers may be reluctant to offer covers for some new risks such as sustainable construction due to the fact that they may not dispose of sufficient data to support their risk underwriting. Improving the availability of information about construction quality for the insurance sector will certainly encourage insurers to explore possibilities to offer new insurance solutions adapted to the needs of the construction sector and its clients.
Thus it appears that the construction market is far from being perfect.
In economy the market is the meeting point of supply and demand. According to the classical theory suppliers and buyers are informed about all characteristics. But it appears that goods / services are not identical and homogeneous and that participants are not equally informed. Consequently markets are characterised by asymmetries of information between supplier and buyer. It favours
5 15/09/2011 opportunistic behaviours and impede the functioning of markets by leading to adverse selection (Akerlof, 1970).
Information asymmetry models assume that at least one party to a transaction has relevant information whereas the other(s) do not. This lead to a principal-agent problem. The agent who acts on behalf of the principal tends to adopt opportunistic behaviours. For example after becoming insured people tend to adopt more risky behaviors.
Asymmetry of information and opportunistic behaviours do not allow a full, precise and thorough appreciation of risks potentially encountered during and after the transaction. This is the case in most, if not all, economic transactions: purchase of a manufactured object, of fresh food, of services ... The consequences of this situation may be defects, accidents, illnesses, disputes, law suits ... In the case of a building project, this means that the investor cannot assess all the risks because all information is not available. An investor is of course never alone but situations of information asymmetry may happen between involved economic actors in building projects: technical designer and product supplier, contractor and architect or product/process supplier, maintenance operator and technical designers/architects... All these transactions can potentially generate building defects due for instance to inappropriate design, to inadequate product choice or skills, to low design that will hamper maintenance... In such a context certification procedures, quality marks and signs will help reducing information asymmetry. It helps identifying the actors of the construction supply chain who have better experiences and records, and the quality of products / works / technical equipments.
2. Background to tender invitation
As indicated by the European Commission in the call for tender specification document the present pilot project has been developed within the framework of the Lead Market Initiative for Europe adopted by the European Commission in order to support certain market sectors of strategic interest within the EU, including sectors of sustainable construction and renewable energies.
In this context, difficulties of access to insurance by craftsmen and small construction companies brought to the attention of the European Parliament by a MEP Mrs Guy-Quint resulted in adoption of a Pilot project entitled “To facilitate access to insurance by building contractors, especially the self- employed and small firms, in order to simulate innovation and the promotion of eco-technologies in the European Union” published in the Official Journal of the EU on 14th March 2008.
In order to examine feasibility of the above Pilot project the European Commission launched 2008 a call for tenders for a research on the subject of “Liability and Insurance Regimes in the Construction Sector, National Schemes and Guidelines to Stimulate Innovation and Sustainability”. A consortium composed of Centre d’Etudes d’Assurances (CEA) and of Centre Scientifique et Technique du Bâtiment (CSTB) was selected in November 2008 to carry out this research project currently known under the name of Elios – European Liability Insurance Organisation Schemes (Contract No: SI2.ACPROCE021941000 Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of 02/12/2008).
6 15/09/2011
The scope of the Elios research contained four main elements:
- Review of the national liability and insurance systems in the EU-27 - Assessment of the impact of the insurance regimes on consumer protection, the competitiveness and the sustainability of the construction sector, and the economics of the insurance market - Identification of insurance schemes and good practices that could help especially craft and small construction enterprises to exploit innovative solutions for sustainable construction and to adopt responsible management - Concrete recommendations about the extent to which the European Commission should support the formation and the promotion of such insurance schemes in the Member States
As opposed to a methodology called “structural” used in numerous previous research projects on the subject of liability and insurance in construction (ex. C. Mathurin, GAIPEC, IGF-CGPC), an alternative approach called “functional” adopted in Elios research consisted in comparison of purposes and goals pursued within the national regimes as well as in analysing their results illustrated by legal and market driven mechanisms adopted in view of achieving these goals.
This method permitted to reveal that in spite of a great diversity existing within the EU Member States in terms of legal rules, market customs and insurance practices, there was however a striking similarity in terms of goals followed within the national regimes, in particular the growing will to provide a greater security and sustainable guarantees for the consumers of construction products and services.
The above will was in particular manifested by:
• Existence of specific legal frameworks governing liability of parties involved in construction projects in a large majority of EU Member States, • Widespread practice of joint and several liabilities between parties to construction projects across EU, • A growing tendency to adopt legally mandatory or widespread market driven schemes providing ten years insurance of latent defects (in particular for dwelling premises)
On the other hand, the research also identified several difficulties or drawbacks existing in the current situation, where various national regimes tend to evolve independently and without any coordination. The main difficulties were:
• Difficulties of many construction firms in operating on cross-border basis due to existing patchwork of various national regimes, • Need of adequate and sustainable guarantees covering risk of innovative technologies used in construction, • Lack of comparability and of mutual recognition of various technical assessment and control methodologies as well as of quality labels and certificates delivered by national quality control and certification organisms, • Difficulties of small and craft construction firms to access construction markets and insurance covers adapted to their needs,
7 15/09/2011
• Lack of sufficient technical data on construction defects and risks related to sustainable construction technologies at a European level.
Further important finding of the Elios research consisted in revealing an increasing impact of the insurance market on processes and methods used in the construction sector due to insurers’ natural role of risk assessment, selection and prevention. The conclusions of the research have shown that insurance played in fact a regulatory role in many countries, in particular where it was systematically taken out due to a legal obligation or requirements of a widespread market practice. Therefore, due to its considerable impact on construction activities there was a large potential for the insurance market to help stimulate innovation and sustainable construction activities via adapted insurance schemes.
In order to address the above difficulties a recommendation provided in the Elios research report consisted in creation of a European Agency for Construction Insurance in charge the following main missions:
• Interface between the European Commission and the Member States in the matters relating to construction insurance, • Single point of contact for information about cross-border construction activities, • Handbook of quality labels and indicators at the European level, • EU observatory and database of construction pathology relative to eco-technologies.
As participants of the former Elios research team we are aware of certain limitations of this project due mainly to its limited time frame and resources available. In particular, the project has not allowed collecting the economic data to the extent that the research team would have wished and also, due to its very large scope covering 27 EU Member States, the degree of detail with which the individual national regimes were analysed had to be limited.
However the findings of the Elios project have brought some new outlook on the European construction insurance and construction liability regimes and have contributed to a better understanding of this subject at a European scale. It has also helped in defining of a more precise framework and objectives which could be subsequently pursued in order to address various difficulties identified, thus opening a new phase in the debate on the matter and creating a new possible step in the evolution of the European context to be explored.
Further to publication of the Elios report a meeting with the stakeholders was organised by the European Commission and the MEP Mrs Estelle Grelier on 23 March 2011, where conclusions of the report were discussed. The recommendations of the Elios report were welcomed by the meeting participants. The representatives of the European Commission announced their intention to launch a new call for tender whose object will be to further elaborate upon the orientations suggested by the Elios Project.
The new pilot project provides an opportunity to address the limitations mentioned and to provide a larger and more detailed analysis of the subject.
8 15/09/2011
3. Understanding of the requirements
3.1. Context
As a continuation of Elios faisability project, the European Commission has decided to express in this new call for tenders its wish to analyse more in depth some aspects and recommendations of the previous pilot project in order to achieve the following aims:
- Achieving an European-wide understanding of existing measures promoting construction quality in Europe and facilitating construction risk assessment in the sector of insurance and reinsurance, - Promoting economic and technical success of internal market of construction services in terms of sustainability, in particular: o by encouraging increased convergence of national regimes of construction insurance o via development of insurance schemes for small construction firms and consumers capable to support cross-border services and to cover construction performances.
In addressing this large and ambitious programme, it is necessary to take into account various publications and initiatives which have influenced the evolution of the internal market of services in the recent years, and more specifically, the sector of sustainable construction. In fact, although there are currently no official European texts referring to insurance of innovation and sustainability risk in the construction sector, it is however possible to highlight various initiatives relative to sustainability in buildings. On the other hand, it is important to bear in mind the political initiatives aiming in developing the European internal market as well as various initiatives undertaken by professional organisations.
From this perspective, the present pilot project necessarily belongs to the context of the existing policies and goals of the European Union, namely:
- Reinforcement and improvement of functioning of internal market of services, which is one of main driving forces of the European economy. The Service Directive from 12 December 2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Directive 2006/123/CE) has considerably reinforced the freedom of operating by suppressing several legal and administrative barriers which were faced by service providers attempting to deliver their services outside of their country of origin. There remains however much to be done and the recently adopted communication “Towards a Single Market Act” (COM 2010 608 final) has confirmed the importance of the internal market of services and the necessity of its continued development. Thus, the Commission has reminded that it is necessary to examine the difficulties for cross-border services providers related to requirements in terms of insurance. This should be done in the first place with the stakeholders concerned, namely the insurance sector, in order to find practical solutions.
- The Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan (COM (2008) 397 final) aiming in transforming the current environmental challenge into
9 15/09/2011
opportunities for the European Union’s economy. This concrete set of actions is proposed in order to improve competitiveness of the EU industry while increasing its overall environmental performance. Wherever possible, the European Commission encourages voluntary initiatives aiming in developing environmental agreements between parties wishing to address specific environmental issues.
- Energy performance policy developed by the European Commission. In order to reinforce savings of energy, several directives have been adopted in order to promote energy efficiency at the level of the internal market, the last one of 19 May 2010 (2010/31/UE).
By the way, a Work Programme of 2010 for implementation of the 'Intelligent Energy - Europe II' has been published by the European Commission on 23 March 2010 in order to set up a common methodology of calculating energy performance of buildings as well as to define desired axes of development for this year.
- The legislation of European technical harmonisation, which is mainly illustrated by the “CE” conformity mark aiming in enabling a free circulation across the whole EU territory of all products having “CE” mark. Bearing in mind that the “CE” mark is neither a certification label nor an indication of geographical origin of the product explains the reasons of its possible coexistence with various national quality labels. It is however desired to maintain compatibility and complementarity of the national labels with the European rules.
3.2. General approach
In terms of approach, it seems clear from the call for tenders specifications and from the European Commission’s will manifested by the above mentioned initiatives, that the present pilot project will need to be performed with the greatest possible involvement of all concerned stakeholders such as various administrative bodies, consumers’ organisations and federations representing professionals from construction and insurance sectors.
In order to address this requirement our consortium has chosen to be the most representative possible in terms of multi- disciplinarity as well as of geographical scope. Experience and reputation of its members across Europe will largely facilitate creation of a wide network of contacts capable to provide all necessary information as well as to enable the composition of a forum of stakeholders.
With respect to the forum, it is intended to become since its creation a multidisciplinary centre of exchange and reflexion aiming in facilitating initiatives and measures proposed and defined by the contractor in order to achieve the required goals and, on the other hand, to reduce some underlying constraints such as confidentiality or credibility of available information.
In more general terms, the present pilot project will need to be able to derive concrete actions from a consensus between various stakeholders in order to achieve quality and to transform a debate into real-life initiatives. This should, in particular bring about the following concrete actions.
10 15/09/2011
Data on quality/conformity marks
- Creation of a directory of quality/conformity marks for construction professionals, property owners and insurers, based on criteria acceptable for all stakeholders concerned. It will be important to make sure that the data on collected quality/conformity marks are neither too general nor too specific to be useful for professional services providing expertise and advice to construction operators, investors and (re)insurance. A precise methodology of data collection and a presentation table of the results obtained should also be developed.
In order to reduce information asymmetry between different stakeholders, marks have for long been introduced in most of the production sectors (manufacturing industry, agro-food business, services ...). The role of these marks is to give information to actors operating on the corresponding markets. These marks may concern any aspect of the “quality” of the service or good which is purchased by a client. Conformity marks will make the customer confident that the product or service he pays for clearly fulfils stated requirements. Normative documents generally contain these requirements. These norms can be either technical norms (product specifications, measurement protocols ...) or norms related to human capacity/skills (training degree, person accreditation ...) (Wolf 2010). Quality marks cover a vast domain. They may concern products, processes, person’s qualifications... The mark delivery process is adapted to each of these different situations but the result is always a “signal” to the customer that the good or service fulfils precise requirements. The user of these marks has to be fully aware of the scope and limits of these requirements. Quality/conformity marks are very often made visible to customers by means of stamped specific logos (on products, on documents related to a service). The use of these marks should ideally not be limited to the control of the presence of this logo. The user should systematically access and read the corresponding documents containing all the relevant details to fully grasp the meaning of this logo. There are also quality marks without logos. For instance the French “Avis technique” is not originally associated to such a logo. The reputation of this quality mark on the concerned market gives its value to the information it contains. It may nevertheless be associated with a CSTBat certification procedure and logo which prove the conformity of the concerned product/process with the technical specifications of the corresponding Avis technique. According to its local context, EU-27 countries have developed their own set of construction-related quality/conformity marks. The corresponding quantity of information is just huge: one single product may show several marks logos as illustrated in figure 1.
11 15/09/2011
Figure 1: example of marks logos on a commercial document of a product for the European market. Through the present call for tenders, the Commission wishes to have a full description of these set of quality/conformity marks by means of a directory. The tenderer understands this directory is not just a list but plans to produce an added-value directory reflecting the above mentioned nuances between countries.
In order to achieve the task of creation of a directory of quality/conformity marks for construction sector, it will obviously be necessary to perform a critical analysis of information on various existing quality/conformity marks, in particular with regards to the following questions:
. What is the level of objectivity with which these marks are awarded (third party, independent technical organisation, public administration body...)? . What is the scope of application of the mark and its limitations? . What is the level of accessibility to the award of the mark, in particular for foreign parties? . Is there a system of mutual recognition? . How information carried by the mark can be used by the sector of insurance (risk assessment, underwriting criteria...)?
- Development at the European level of credible and recognised construction quality indicators in terms of active disorders prevention in which technical control is intended to play a central role, measures of control and of self-control by specialised organisations and collection of construction disorders data recorded by the sector of insurance and reinsurance.
The question of the value and use of the quality/conformity marks by the insurance sector for the purpose of assessment and control of risks related to building construction and operation has to be addressed. The detailed tasks related to this action are described in work package 1 (WP1).
Data on pathology Building pathology is a worldwide concern as confirmed by the work of the International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB, www.cibworld.nl) W086 commission “Building pathology”. This commission is “concerned with learning from past and current building pathologies and encouraging the systematic application of that knowledge to the design, construction and management of buildings”. Examples of organisms collecting and recording building pathology in Europe include:
12 15/09/2011
Byggeskadefonden (BSF, www.bsf.dk ) in Denmark National House-Building Council (NHBC, www.nhbc.co.uk ) in UK Agence Qualité Construction (AQC, www.qualiteconstruction.com) in France,
Pathology can virtually concern any building part. Water is known to be a major pathology triggering factor. Pathology related to traditional techniques (structural cracks, roof leaks, rendering cracking, wood rot, corrosion...) are well identified and prevention measures are codified in construction rules documents. As construction is open to innovation, unprecedented pathology situation may be expected to emerge from the introduction of innovations.The sources of pathology for such “innovative” buildings are mainly traditional sources: loose design, inappropriate implementation, lack of communication between actors. The suggested measures to improve the situation also echo former recommendations of W 086 commission and other pathology specialists: make relevant information easily available and accessible, raise awareness of actors (through improved initial education and permanent training), better explain the scope and limits of quality/conformity marks, improve cooperation between actors during the construction projects… Through the present call for tenders, the Commission wishes to analyse the needs and the criteria to develop an EU-wide database on quality and pathology indicators, in particular the potential value of this information for the construction and the (re) insurance sectors. The tenderer understands the data-base to be developed during the pilot project to be flexible enough to adapt to the evolutions of its use and to be able to collect available data from different sources. The added-value of this data base will be the analysis of the perspectives of further development as well as the associated technical, organisational and economic feasibility conditions.
It is understood that the collection of existing data on pathology may be considered as a potentially delicate question. For this reason, it will be necessary to find means of producing scientifically neutral records, enabling the insurers and other concerned parties to contribute into the database without compromising their interest. This goal may be achieved by developing mutual or sector agreements defining procedures of collection and of exploitation of data on pathology.
Data could be provided by members of the forum, in particular insurers, experts and public or private technical controllers in charge of examining construction disorders. Most practical channels of data collection should be defined for each national regime in order to ensure coherence and to avoid situations where some incidents are not reported or where the same incident is reported by several parties.
Information on pathology should also be looked for via other channels such as enquiries or public queries as well as interviews, experts’ opinions or cooperation with specialised organisms such as public authorities, professional bodies and scientific research institutions.
13 15/09/2011
In order to ensure coherence of data collected, a unified format for data reporting should be elaborated. It may be created in a form of an electronic system or other appropriate tool for collection and analysis of data.
. Diffusion of data
Collected data on pathology should be adequately diffused to provide maximum impact for the benefit of construction stakeholders and other parties. It would be desirable for such data to highlight reasons of occurring defects by defined categories such as type of building or by region as well as measures to prevent or avoid disorders.
It will be also intended to create adequate measures of control and of alert with regard to relatively significant disorders related to introducing in the European market innovative products or processes, in particular in the field of eco-technologies.
In order to make sure that these quality measures and tools are practical, they need to be made accessible to construction parties and insurers via appropriate media such as Internet, press revues or conferences.
Also, it will need to be ensured that the collected data can play a role of an indicator useful to the insurance sector for the purposes. The detailed tasks related to this action are described in work package 2 (WP2).
3.3. Place of insurance in Europe
Besides technical aspects, the Commission has also expressed its wish to encourage a more convergent evolution of various national regimes as well as development, on the basis of construction quality indicators, of specialised schemes dedicated to cover construction performances in terms of sustainability.
The goals of the new pilot project may be expressed in the following way:
Need of enhanced convergence between national regimes: encourage development of common criteria which will need to be met by construction insurance schemes, thus acting in favour of more national convergence by adoption of functional approach in order to limit growing heterogeneity of national regimes.
Facilitated access to information: accompany European and cross-border activities via enhanced access to information for service providers and to insurance solutions necessary to their activities:
. Identification of national single points of contacts created in the framework of the Service Directive (art 21) and assessment of their needs in terms of information, . Evaluation of practical difficulties faced by service providers, related to of insurance requirements which they are due to meet when delivering cross-border services, . Reflexion on development of an Internet educational tool available to construction firms on the basis of the Elios revue of 27 national regimes of liability and insurance,
14 15/09/2011
. Creation and continuous updating of overviews of national construction liability and insurance regimes in 27 EU Member States.
Promotion of insurance schemes: Development, in cooperation with the insurance and reinsurance sector as well as other concerned sectors, of insurance schemes projects aiming to address specifically requirements which are most frequently requested by construction professionals and investors (in terms of duration of cover, cross-border activities, energy performance of buildings...)
The detailed tasks related to this action are described in work package 3 (WP3).
Success of this new pilot project, namely of the concrete measures which will be proposed and created within the following three years, will depend of continued genuine European policy of construction insurance. In this context the role of the forum seems crucial, to the extent that it will become a privileged platform of exchange and of reflection in order to achieve a consensus acceptable for different stakeholders concerned. 4. General Methodology
This pilot project is at the crossroad of several aspects of the construction and insurance activities. It is important to maintain the widest approach possible when broaching the different aspects.
The two main objectives that the methodology adopted has to achieve are as follows:
- To define how the data will be collected and exploited in a practical manner
- To associate and to facilitate an exchange and relay of information. From our point of view, this could materialise in the form of a contractual agreement. The forum has a central role to play in this interactive communication.
4.1. Definition of criterion and assessment of their level of pertinence in terms of quality/conformity marks and inventory of information on existing pathology and their assessment in the insurance sector
a) compatibility between quality marks and CE marking
b) impact of the quality marks on the competitiveness of construction businesses
c) impact de quality indicators on cross border activity
d) modalities to follow to have access to the quality marks
e) value of information on quality and pathology on the insurance sectors
f) construction insurance within the context of national strategies for energy and climate change
g) position of construction insurance in comparison with other mechanisms for the protection of investors’ interests
15 15/09/2011
4.2. Collect and contact with the parties involved in the pilot project
a) Use and implementation of a network, composed of all the parties involved, constituted in the framework of their domain of expertise, as well as taking into account their previous participation in National and European studies (see annex Map of European contacts)
b) Forum members are to put into place a relay of information for each member state in order to obtain a widespread understanding of the local systems and their evaluation of construction quality and the methods of risk assessment used by the Insurance sector.
c) The setting up and implementation of an Inventory of national contacts, set up in the framework of the Directive Service (article 21)
d) Definition and handling of national administration and legislation regarding construction and insurance
e) Inventory of public or private institutions aiming to improve construction quality and the prevention of pathology on a national and/or European scale
4.3. Modalities for collecting information and the establishment of an inventory
I. Analysis based on existing information:
a. inventory of quality/conformity marks in construction markets for products, processes, works, technical equipment and professional qualifications;
b. existing research on quality in construction and building pathology;
II. Analysis based on cross-border activities.
III. Elaboration and signature of an agreement/convention with all the parties concerned, with the aim of defining the modalities of their participation in terms of collecting information
IV. Conditions of the dissemination of fate and information gathered by the team
Furthermore a specific methodology for each Work Package is explained more in details in the correspondent chapters.
16 15/09/2011
5. Links with previous activities
The table below presents a list of the studies, projects and databases that we intend to use in order to start our study with a large documentary basis. An important number of these sources have been elaborated by or with the participation of our consortium members. The idea is take into account a maximum number of existing significant studies, projects and databases that have been carried out on a national and European scale.
TITLE OF THE STUDY DATE ELABORATED BY OUTLINE/AIM OF THE STUDY
Purpose: The objectives of the SURE project are to:
- Build a Nordic network among industry, authorities and researchers to improve knowledge exchange on sustainable procurement. - Summarise state-of-the-art on the interplay between life- cycle costing, environmental assessment of buildings and SURE: sustainable procurement. Sustainable
Refurbishment - Partners: SBi/AAU, - Assess and classify various sustainable procurement Multiconsult A/S, strategies already being deployed by public clients on lifecycle Jan 2009 – VTT and refurbishment of existing public buildings. procurement Nov 2011 Innovation Center and - Analyse the experiences of public clients acting as Icelan sustainable change agents on the implementation of management by sustainable refurbishment in construction and real estate. public clients - Develop guidelines for sustainable refurbishment of existing buildings by public clients. - Disseminate the lessons learned, the developed classification of procurement strategies and the guidelines for implementing sustainable refurbishment.
Purpose: The last decade has seen much work done to establish key performance indicators for the performance of both Partners: SBi/AAU, VTT, Senate buildings and companies within the construction and real CREDIT: Properties, SINTEF, estate cluster. Despite these initiatives, a number of challenges Construction Lund University, remain to be addressed. Facing these challenges, CREDIT aims Innovation Center at improving transparency on value creation in real estate and and Real Estate - Nov 2007 – Iceland, Vilnius Developing Sep 2010 construction. The objective of CREDIT is to develop methods Gediminas and tools that support the identification and understanding of Indicators for Technical user needs and the interpretation of these needs as Transparency University and Tallinn University requirements for building performance. The project focuses on of Technology. buildings as places to work, live and learn.
17 15/09/2011
TITLE OF THE STUDY DATE ELABORATED BY OUTLINE/AIM OF THE STUDY
Purpose: Public development programmes have played a Typehusbyggerie significant role in Danish endeavours to stimulate innovation in t – bygherrens the building industry through industrialisation. In recent years, rolle i the policy and research efforts in both Denmark and abroad has innovation (Co- emphasised the role of the client as a driver for change in construction of construction. It is worth noting that the primary focus of public clients, concepts development programmes has been on social housing and and companies: Apr 2005 – multi-storey buildings whereas our knowledge on innovation SBi/AAU Exploring the Dec 2005 within small, privately owned dwellings is rather limited despite role of clients in the huge economic impact of this segment of construction. innovation Single-family housing is one of the few segments of related to construction, where the client, the owner and the end-user is industrialised one and the same person both legally and physically. Thus, single-family single-family housing offers a unique opportunity to explore housing) the role of clients in shaping the concepts and innovative strategies of companies and vice versa.
Purpose: The purpose of the project is to ensure qualitatively improved buildings by reducing the number of defects with at least 50 % during a 10 year period through the establishment of a web based quality assurance and benchmarking system. More RUB - Veien til specifically, the objectives are: Riktig Utførte SBi/AAU, Bygg (RUB – The Multiconsult A/S - To document lessons learned in Denmark. Sep 2005 – plus numerous Road to Nov 2008 industry and - To produce six-monthly benchmarks of defects, deviance Correctly research institutes and damages in all phases of the building process. Executed in Norway - To establish a benchmarking scheme. Building) - To establish a web based reporting system. - To change behaviour through posters, seminars etc.
In the wake of quality assurance, benchmarking and key performance indicators have been emphasised as an effective strategy to improve productivity and stimulate innovation. Over the past decade much work has been done to establish key performance indicators for the performance of both buildings and companies within the construction and real estate cluster. A typology of However, focus has been put on finding the “right” indicators benchmarking Oct 2006 SBi/AAU whereas the institutional and organisational setting of the systems benchmarking schemes has been largely ignored. The objective of this paper is to examine a number of benchmarking schemes in use in Denmark in order to provide a generalised typology of benchmarking schemes within construction and real estate. This typology will not only be of academic interest but also of interest to authorities and other actors who wants to introduce or reshape benchmarking schemes.
18 15/09/2011
TITLE OF THE STUDY DATE ELABORATED BY OUTLINE/AIM OF THE STUDY
Construction Overview and global analysis of construction risk insurance in may 2011 Roland SUDRES Risk Insurance France and worldwide
Prominent Registry of construction claims higher than 3 M€ (present Construction 2011 Roland SUDRES value) over the last 40 years, on the French territory Pathology
Daily risk analysis of important construction projects for facultative reinsurance underwriting purpose.
Examples of studied projects :
Internal risk - ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) - -ongoing Roland SUDRES analysis Cadarache (research facility) - The shard - London (office / hotel tower) - Musée Louis Vuitton - Paris (museum) - Carpe Diem / Tour Generali / Tour Majunga / Tour First / Tour D2 - Paris La Défense (office / dwelling towers)
Examples of studies in the field of building pathology: Product - Dutch Safety Board (‘Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid’): information by studies on several aspects of incidents with facade cladding means of CE- - Various building owners, law courts, insurers, lawyers: marking and PRC / ARCADIS, 2000 - building pathology studies on several construction ‘Recognized department present incidents damages, defects. Strategic Advice Quality - Belgian Bank: assessment of the safety of facades and Statement’ of roofs of various buildings of bank buildings in Europe KOMO in the Service provided: Netherlands Building pathology research, inspection and consultancy
PRC Bouwcentrum International has carried out a study for the European Commission on the way whether and how the 27 Member states of the European Union currently regulate sustainable construction. This study is done in the framework of the Lead Market Initiative (LMI), the European policy that aims to stimulate the market for products and services for sustainable construction in Europe. Lead Market Initiative – The study has screened the way how sustainable construction Screening of is regulated, and also how these regulations are enforced on a national building day to day basis in each country. Finally the study assesses regulations on 2010-2011 PRC / ARCADIS whether and how non-public market initiatives and public- sustainable private initiatives complement to formal building regulatory construction in systems in addressing sustainability goals. The study report the European assesses the coherence and efficiency of the building regulatory Union systems, and identifies the possible needs for coordination at EU level to consolidate the regulatory framework Services provided : Data collection (by means of an online questionnaire), interviews with stakeholders, round table meetings with participants from the construction sector, governments and experts
19 15/09/2011
TITLE OF THE STUDY DATE ELABORATED BY OUTLINE/AIM OF THE STUDY
Market survey on the position of CE Marking for building products on the Dutch construction market, in comparison with the KOMO quality mark . Is CE Marking accompanied by enough information on the product characteristics and how is this information provided with quality statements of KOMO? What Building PRC / ARCADIS, is the content of the CE-marking, also in relation with the pathology 2009-2010 department Technical Advice Declaration of Performance or the new Construction Products Regulation? Services provided : Desk research, interviews with producers, architects, clients, contractors. Data collection
Study to Study on the economic effects of the Construction Products evaluate the Directive. Stakeholder interviews, case studies, economic Internal Market analysis of cross border effects and competitiveness aspects, and round table conferences, reporting, workshops. competitiveness effects of Services provided : Council Directive Nov.2005- PRC Bouwcentrum Expertise on certification, quality/conformity marks, CE- 89/106/EEC Febr. 2007 International marking, economic effects, statistical data collection, market (Construction studies Products Directive, CPD)’. Published report on website EC
Study on type of guarantees in the Dutch construction process (limited guarantee, absolute guarantee, insured guarantee, standardised/non-standardised guarantee), the legal aspects, To get risks and guarantees per building element (foundation, floor guarantees, to PRC Bouwcentrum etc.) 2004 give guarantees’ International Services provided : Expertise on warranties/guarantees, construction process, private law aspects, research and consultancy. Project management,
Several analyses on the market position of building materials Market Research for Dutch and European branch organisations in the field of 1985 – Projects sand-limestone, concrete, ceramic bricks, insulation materials, ongoing cladding sheets and gypsum. Also market-studies within the framework of EC-funded projects.
Aware of a continuously evolving European context, and as a Edifis : a study continuation of the recent studies carried out for the for the construction sector (Directive services, Elios report, the ‘livret implementation vert’ - handbook with the view of creating a European Contract mars 2011 of a European CEA Law), UEPC appointed CEA to examine the conditions that – ongoing contract for would be necessary for implementing a European contract, promotors which would ensure the protection of first time buyers, and the durability of enterprise’s investments by the members of it’s different professional organisations across Europe
20 15/09/2011
TITLE OF THE STUDY DATE ELABORATED BY OUTLINE/AIM OF THE STUDY
Liability and Insurance The Elios project, which has been carried out by CEA (Centre regimes in the d'Etudes d'Assurances) and CSTB (Centre Scientifique construction Technique de Bâtiment) at the request of the European sector: national 2008 - CEA and CSTB Commission, offered the first opportunity to study the building schemes and 2010 insurance systems of the 27 EU Member States as well as their guidelines to impact on sustainable development stimulate innovation and sustainability
CEA was appointed as expert with the office of the Minister of Liability and the independents, PMe, the agriculture and the scienfitic insurance politics, to draft a project of royal order on the compulsory regimes of the 2004 - insurance of architects. This study has been published and is architect – CEA 2006 quoted in the background of the law project concerning the Current exercise of the profession of architect within the framework of situation in a legal entity. The law was promulgated on February the 15th Europe 2006.
Current Client: UPSI (Union Professionnelle du Secteur Immobilier) – European Professional organisation for Real Estate sector situation on the 2006 CEA BELGIUM Performance of a study on the monopol of architects and their freedom of role as well as their relationships with the property developers. access to the act to build The scope of the study covered 15 EU Member States.
Client: Conseil des Architectes Européens – CAE Liability and Elaboration of an information platform on liability and insurance regimes of architects in Europe.
insurance of the 2008 – in CEA BELGIUM architects in the progress EU-32
Insurance Insurance consultant for “Concept and Design team” for 2006-2008 CEA BELGIUM consultant construction of the new NATO headquarters.
The architects’ office of Samyn & Partners (Belgium), Studio Valle Progettazioni (Italy) and Buro Happold (UK) were held to Insurance 2008- in CEA BELGIUM restructure and enlargen the “Residence Palace”, the future consultant progress headquarters of the European council and the Cabinet of the European Union in Brussels.
Participation in the works led in
the field of the liabilities and Groups of studies on the works on existing buildings. the insurances Subcontracting Commission, Member of the Deregulation construction by Commission. Consultant at the Technical Committee of the 1978-2008 CEA concerned Insurance Construction chaired by the Ministry of Equipment. Ministries (reforms 1978, 1982, 1984, 1996, 2005, 2007, and 2008)
21 15/09/2011
TITLE OF THE STUDY DATE ELABORATED BY OUTLINE/AIM OF THE STUDY
Client: Plan Europe Guide Plan This 2009 guide aims to give information to construction Europe - Impacts professionals (focusing on contracting authorities, owners, de 2008-2009 architects, designers) in order to help them getting more l'harmonisation CSTB familiar with the changes introduced by the Construction européenne sur Products Directive. Information sheet 7 of this document la construction addresses certification marks issues. (report available in French on www.dpcnet.org)
CPE Guide pour Client: ADEME le montage et le suivi des The aim of this guide is to help public authorities to implement contrats de energy saving performance contracts. The document focuses 2009 performance CSTB on legal, economical, organisational and technical aspects. énergétique http://www.cstb.fr/fileadmin/documents/telechargements/Gui dans les collèges de_CPE_V1_15_02_10.pdf et les lycées
Client: QUALITEL 09-2010 to 07- Fiches qualité 2011 CSTB The aim was to review and amend texts intended to be web pages of a general public website aiming to promote quality marks in housing construction: www.bienacheterbienrenover.fr
Client: CREAHd
Case study analysis aiming to Identify innovation practices in CREAHd 2011 – in CSTB progress the field of sustainable construction in the Région Aquitaine (South-west of France). In some case studies, the role of marks is addressed (incentive or obstacle).
Clint: EC- enterprise and industry DG
Greening processes of the building sector will impact the whole value chain of services, from design, planning, construction or 2009-2012 – in refurbishing processes down to the maintenance and GREENCONSERVE progress CSTB destruction of residential and commercial buildings. The joint project overarching goal is to design, implement and test a novel scheme to accelerate service innovation brought by SMEs active in the construction industry in Norway, France and Germany. The role of marks is addressed in some of the innovation projects
Client: EC - DG TREN, Reports Public presentation to European construction stakeholders www.green-it.eu
Green initiative for energy efficient eco-products in the construction industry was aiming at developing a European GREEN-IT 2006-2008 CSTB label and a database promoting the performances of construction products improving the energy efficiency of buildings (report available on http://www.green- it.eu/userdata/documents/180_EIE_05_024_GREEN_IT_Publsh able_Executive_Report.pdf
22 15/09/2011
6. Project management
6.1. Coordination tasks
The project coordination is ensured by the project coordinator, CEA (Centre d’Etudes d’Assurances). The Project Coordinator will be responsible for the general co-ordination of the different work packages and aspects of the project and also for the day to day communications with the EC. The Project Coordinator will also be responsible for all technical, administrative, financial and legal issues.
The National House-Building Council (NHBC) will support CEA in coordinating process by playing an advisory role. The NHBC is one of rare entities having competences of construction standard setting, construction pathology analysis, technical control and insurance, therefore the experience of the NHBC will enable to achieve synergy between different aspects of the project will be very valuable in order to ensure coherence between the different elements of this research.
Work packages co-ordinators will be responsible for the co-ordination of their correspondent work packages.
Main responsibilities for the Project Coordinator are the following:
Be the single contact point with the EC for contractual matters;
Ensure that the tasks and deliverables are produced on time within the required quality level; Receive all payments made by the Commission and administer them. The Project Coordinator shall ensure that the appropriate payments are made to contractors without unjustified delay;
Prepare and submit all the periodic reports to the EC;
Co-ordinate the different WP’s through the WP’s leaders, being these responsible on behalf of him for the development of assigned tasks and delivery of specific reports and action included in their work packages;
Be the chairman of the Steering Committee
Review and assess the project results and progress towards the objectives, taking the corresponding decisions or reporting to the Steering Committee if needed;
Update periodically the risk analysis done before the starting of the project……
23 15/09/2011
6.2. Management organisation and tasks
In order to facilitate the decision making process, work package leaders were appointed. They will be in charge of the execution of all working activities, decisions, management of tasks and communication with the task leaders within their work package. The work package leaders are responsible for their teams and must ensure the efficient flow of information between the members of their groups and the rest of the consortium. They form the first level of decision-taking, informing directly the steering committee of significant delays or problems that might occur. A steering committee will be established within the consortium, consisting of the project coordinator and the work package leaders. The steering committee is responsible for the monitoring of the work execution, delegation of work packages, motivation of the team, encouragement of creativity, correct problem-solving procedures and corrective action. The project co-ordinator CEA will act as moderator and mediator, having the responsibility of ensuring that correct procedures are carried out and all deadlines and project obligations are met. CEA will be responsible for seeking consensus, but in the case of dispute, decisions will be taken by majority voting, with representatives of each partner of the consortium having one vote. The liaison with the European Commission is maintained via the coordinator.
6.3. The scientific committee
The role of the scientific committee will consist in giving general orientations to this project, thanks to an exchange of ideas with University professors and/or high qualified experts. The competences gathered will cover construction law, insurance law, financial, economic and technical aspects of both construction and insurance sectors
List of Participants:
NAME FUNCTION SPECIALITY/DOMAIN
Professor of Construction Law, University of Benoît KOHL Construction Law Liège
Construction techniques Ole BONNELYCKE B.S.F and qualification procedures
Professor of Insurance Law, University of Diana CERINI Insurance Law Milan
Professor of Insurance Law, University of Jérôme KULLMAN Paris I Pantheon Sorbonne Insurance Law Chairman of AIDA Construction techniques Jean-Daniel Previously Technical Director of CSTB and qualification MERLET procedures
Honorary Chairman of UPSI Belgium and Financial and Real Estate André SOUGNE UEPC Operations
24 15/09/2011
It is intended that this Scientific Committee sits in the same intervals as the meetings of the Forum according to the agenda specified by the Commission in the Invitation to Tender.
6.4. European Professional Stakeholders representatives
We propose to set up an informal body constituted by the main European Professional Stakeholders Representatives. This body intended as working committee, would play an important advisory role in the pilot project. Representatives of this body would be also participants of the Forum but the committee would be smaller in numbers and more informal, which could be helpful in addition to the Forum in providing more technical and professional information and opinion on concrete matters relevant to the project, in particular in terms of construction disorders information.
Members of this committee would be exclusively representants of construction and insurance professionals on a European level, whereas the Forum would be open to a much larger audience including national or regional organisations.
6.5. Risk assessment
There are no potential risks for society or citizens associated with the project and therefore no communication strategy will be adopted in this regard. However, prevention of risks/failures in the project has been contemplated in this proposal through a FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) exercise. These techniques are well known in the quality field and allow the prevention of potential failure modes and the prioritisation of their effects. Automotive suppliers, by instance, have to include an FMEA for every new product they are making for a first level manufacturer.
This technique has been adapted to the type of project proposed in this document and the results of
the analysis are showed in the next table:
-
ty -
Potential
failure
Proba
bility of bility
Severi offailure Risk or Effect of the Failure IndexRisk Mitigation Plans (High, Failure mode (Sever. X Medium, (H, M, L) Probab.) Low)
Non reliable Large dissemination of data WP1 M L M/L information and dialogue Lack of Strong involvement of the WP2 H M H/M transparency stakeholders Strong bound between Weakness of risk WP3 H M H/M technical and insurance appetite approach
25 15/09/2011
The risk identified for the achievement of each work packages and mitigation measures have been described in each work package.
Generally, it appears that these risks are largely related to two factors:
- Necessity of a large exchange of information and opinions with the various stakeholders (construction and insurance sectors, consumers, public authorities).
In order to collect reliable data on quality and conformity marks and construction pathology, taking into account of the great diversity of national regimes, a great importance has been attached to the Forum and creation of the European Professional Stakeholders Representatives committee has been proposed as well as issuing of a newsletter. An important part of the work programme for the Work Package 4 has been dedicated to communication and data dissemination.
- Secondly, various tasks need to contribute to a common initiative, even though they require skills and expertise from various fields. For this reason we have envisaged cross-participation of various intervenants in the Work Packages, strong coordination and the Steering Group as well as a transversal role of management adviser by the NHBC.
26 15/09/2011
7. Level of involvement and activity of other stakeholders
We understand that the approach of this project cannot be successful without involvement of a maximum number of stakeholders. This is why it was proposed to create a forum and European Stakeholders representatives committee.
European quality marks are very numerous and they are often dedicated to suit different categories of parties (clients, construction professionals, insurance) and it is necessary to achieve a global vision of the situation.
In terms of construction pathology, it is also necessary to obtain cooperation of different parties concerned in order to make it possible to gather the maximum of relevant data.
We believe that our consortium is well resourced in this respect as it benefits of a large network of contacts and partners at the European and national level, which would be available to support us in this research.
The following tables provide the lists of the consortium contact network:
European organisations
ACE - Architect’s Council of Europe BIPAR - The European Federation of Insurance Intermediaries CEA - European Insurance and Reinsurance Federation CEBC - Consortium of European Building Control CECODHAS - The European Liaison Committee for Social Housing CEPMC - Council of European Producers of Materials for Construction COBATY INTERNATIONAL - Fédération Internationale de la Construction, de l’Urbanisme et de l’Environnement EBC - European Builders Confederation EFCA - European Federation of Engineering Consultancy Associations EOTA - European Organisation for Technical Approvals EPF - European Property Federation FIEC - European Construction Industry Federation GEAAC - Groupement Européen pour L’Assurance des Architectes et Concepteurs UEAtc - European Union of Agrément UEPC - European Union of Developers and House Builders
27 15/09/2011
COUNTRY NATIONAL ORGANISATION
Austria VVO – Association of Austrian Insurance Companies
Belgium BBRI – Belgian Building Research Institute Bouwunie – The Flemmish Federation of the SMEs of Construction Ministère des PME
Protect SA – Insurance company SPF – Economie Service des Assurances SCRL SECO cvba
Bulgaria Bulgarian Construction Chamber
Cyprus Andreas Neocleous & Co LLC Ministry of Communications and Works
Ministry of Interior
Czech Republic Association of Building Entrepreneurs in the Czech Rep. CACE – Czech Association of Consulting Engineers CCA – Czech Chamber of Architects
CVUT – Czech Technical University CZB – Guild for Building Insulation VIG – Czech Insurance Association VUT – University of Technology
28 15/09/2011
COUNTRY NATIONAL ORGANISATION
Denmark AIDA – International Association of Insurance Law BEC – Byggeriets Evaluerings Center – Danish Benchmarking Centre for Construction
Byggeskadefonden – Building Defects Fund Byggeskadefonden vedr. Bygningsfornyelse – The Building Damage Fund for Urban Renewal Erhvervs- og Byggestyrelsen – Danish Enterprise and Construction Authority FRI – Danish Association of Consulting Engineers Huseftersynsordningen – HE-sekretariatet (House Inspection System) Nyhussektionen, Dansk Byggeri (Section for New Built Homes, Danish Construction Association) University of Copenhagen
Estonia Estonian Association of Architectural and Consulting Engineering Companies Marsh Kindlustusmaakler AS
Finland Ministry of Environment
29 15/09/2011
COUNTRY NATIONAL ORGANISATION
France AIDA – International Association of Insurance Law APREF – Association des Professionnels de la Réassurance en France AQC – Agence Qualité Construction CAPEB – La Confédération de l’Artisanat et des Petites Entreprises du Bâtiment CFEC – Compagnie Française des Experts Construction CICF – Chambre de l'Ingénierie et du Conseil de France COPREC – Confédération des Organismes indépendants tierce partie de Prévention, de Contrôle et d’Inspection Euro-Info Consommateurs FEPL – Fédération des Entreprises Publiques Locales FFACB – Fédération Française des Artisans Coopérateurs du Bâtiment FFB – Fédération Française du Bâtiment FPI – Fédération des Promoteurs Immobiliers FFSA – Fédération Française des Sociétés d’Assurances FNTP – Fédération Nationale des Travaux Public GEMA – Groupement des entreprises mutuelles d'assurances Ministère de l’Écologie, de l’Energie, du Développement durable et de la Mer OPQIBI QUALIBAT QUALISPORT Syntec – Ingénierie USG – Union Syndicale de la Géotechnique USH – Union Sociale pour l’Habitat
Germany BDB – Bund Deutcher Baumeister, Architecten und Intenieure e.V BIngK – Federal Chamber of German Engineers
DIBt – Deutshe Institut für Bautechnik GDV – German Insurance Industry Association German Construction Industry Federation HDI Gerling Versicherung VBI – German Association of Consulting Engineers
30 15/09/2011
COUNTRY NATIONAL ORGANISATION
Greece Hellenic Association of Insurance Companies Victoria
Italy ANCE ANIA Assicurazioni Generali S.P.A.
ISVAP
Latvia Ministry of Economics of Latvia, Building and Housing Department
Lithuania Balto Link Lithuanian Builders Association
Luxembourg Allen & Overy Luxembourg
Malta Architect & Civil Engineer Building Regulations Office Chamber of Architects and Civil Engineers EC Malta – Malta European Consumer Centre
The Netherlands Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment SWK – Stichting Waarborgofonds Koopwoningen Woningborg
Norway FNH – Norwegian Financial Services Association
31 15/09/2011
COUNTRY NATIONAL ORGANISATION
Poland Beiten Burkhardt ITB – Instytut Techniki Budowlanej PIU – Polska Izba Ubezpieczeń
SIDIR – Stowarzyszenie Inżynierów, Doradców i Rzeczoznawców
Portugal PT AECOPS – Portuguese Federation of Construction and Public Works Industry
Romania Allianz Tiriac Asigurari S.A. ECC –Net – European Consumer Centre Romania Muşat & Asociaţii
Slovenia Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Slovenia Chamber of Construction and Building Materials Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning of Slovenia
Triglav Insurance Company Zavarovalnica Maribor d.d
Spain ASEFA Caser Seguros CNC – Confederación National de la Construcción
Seguros MAPFRE Typsa Group UNESPA – Unión Española de Entidades Aseguradoras y Reaseguradoras
Sweden AB Bostadsgaranti Ministry of the Environment of Sweden SE – Swedish Insurance Federation
STD – Svensk Teknik och Design
Switzerland Swiss Re Baloise
32 15/09/2011
COUNTRY NATIONAL ORGANISATION
United Kingdom ABI – Association of British Insurers ASFP – Association for Specialist Fire Protection AVIVA
BBA – British Board of Agreement FMB – Federation of Master Builders King’s College London, Centre of Construction Law Lloyd’s of London RSA – Royal Sun Alliance Zero Carbon Hub
33 15/09/2011
8. Team proposed for implementation of the contract
Germany Hannover Re
34 15/09/2011
8.1. List of participants
Short Date enter Date exit N° Participant names Member names Country names project project
1 APAVE APAVE Claire DOUTRELUINGNE Month 1 Month 36 Emmanuel AMY DE LA France BRETEQUE 2 Centre d’Etudes CEA Jean ROUSSEL France Month 1 Month 36 d’Assurances Gilbert LEGUAY
François-Xavier DUSSAULX Amy SKYRME Belgium Pierre COLPAERT Sonja SMITS Valérie AERENS UK Monika TAKUSKA 3 Belgian Building BBRI Delphine GOFFINET Belgium Month 1 Month 36 Research Institute Eric WINNEPENNINCKX Benny DE BLAERE 4 Centre Scientifique et CSTB Jean-luc SALAGNAC Yannick LEMOIGNE Technique du Frédéric BOUGRAIN Month 1 Month 36 Bâtiment Frank ANDRIEUX Benoît VINOT France
5 Alten Alten Lionel CLOT Month 12 Month 36
6 Hannover Ré Hannov Roland SUDRES Germany Month 1 Month 36 er Re Thomas DUNAND Sabine BERNARD 7 National House- NHBC Lewis SIDNICK United- Month 1 Month 36 Kingdom Building Council Neil JEFFERSON Neil SMITH Joani REID Nicholas LYES Lianne HARRISON 8 PRC Bouwcentrum PRC Henk VERMANDE Holland Month 1 Month 36 International /ARCADIS 9 Danish Building SBi/AAU Kim HAUGBØLLE Denmark Month 1 Month 36 Research Institute, Ernst Jan de Place HANSEN Stefan Christoffer GOTTLIEB Aalborg University 10 Technical and Test TZUS Simon PALUPčík Czech Month 1 Month 36 Republic Institute for JiřÍ Sobola Construction
35 15/09/2011
CENTRE D’ETUDES www.cea-assurances.fr D’ASSURANCE
The Centre d’Etudes d’Assurances is an insurance broker and consultant specialised in domains of construction law, liability and insurance. CEA aims to provide independent and highly specialised advice to help our clients understand, manage and control their risks and insurances. CEA specialises in the following fields:
Brokerage : analysing the risks, and investigating and proposing the best solutions. CEA represents the insured with the aim of assisting him/her manage his/her coverage, particularly in the case of a claim. Each insurance request is studied carefully and the aim is to obtain coverage that is best adapted to the needs of our client, and most competitive in terms of cost and quality and, if necessary, offers the best conditions available on the French market. Assistance/Advice : Every intervention described above can result in a specific support assignment, for which special fees are applicable. Examples of such interventions include organising a purchase of coverage at an arm’s length, support and follow-up of contentious matters, or matters relating to disputes with the insurer. Audit : Audit assignments, also available as a specific service for which special fees apply, is similar to the latter. Its aim however is to produce a schedule of conditions giving an independent professional’s assessment. Thus it provides an objective analysis of the general concept of an insurance programme or any particular aspect of coverage, of risk exposure, of protection from risks, of management of potential loss experience or an analysis based on statistics. Delegated management: We provide this service, which is completely independent from all other services we offer, for the benefit of insurance companies or corporate clients wishing to delegate the administration of their claims in construction insurance, liabilities or guarantees. Managed by a specially trained team, our assignments in delegated management are supported by our profound knowledge of the domain in question, and implemented by setting specific contingency procedures and expert reporting. Training: We regularly organise training days, relating to our domains of competence, and frequently participate in training courses and conferences on related subjects.
Centre d’Etudes d’Assurances has participated in several studies and European projects (see section 4 “Links with previous studies”). In particular, CEA together with the CSTB were joint contractors for the Elios I pilot study on liability and insurance regimes in the construction sector.
CEA is certified ISO 9001
36 15/09/2011
CENTRE SCIENTIFIQUE ET www.cstb.fr TECHNIQUE DU BATIMENT
CSTB was founded in 1947 in order to coordinate and supervise reconstruction in France after World War II. CSTB complies of four complementary trades: research, advanced engineering, quality assessment and the dissemination of knowledge. In combination with its fields of expertise, they allow CSTB to adopt a global approach to buildings which includes their urban environment, services and new information and communication technologies. CSTB collaborates with contracting authorities, architects, research offices, manufacturers and entrepreneurs, and helps the French public authorities to define technical regulations and ensure the quality of buildings. CSTB is a State owned industrial and commercial corporative, placed under the administrative supervision of the French Ministry of Housing. It is one of Europe's leading research and evaluation centres. Its experts include specialists in construction materials and techniques, facilities, safety, thermal engineering, acoustics, aerodynamics, lighting, the environment, health, new information and communication technologies, economics and sociology. Three departments of CSTB are involved in the proposal. The "Economics and Social Sciences" department which mainly deals with society issues. The teams of this department carry out applied research, studies, consultancy and training in the fields of economics and sociology. It is able to answer questions raised not only by the public authorities, but also by the building, housing and urban management sectors. It helps them to understand social tensions and provides professionals with suitable modes of intervention and solutions. The “Services, processes and innovation centre” focuses on:
Analysis of Public Private Partnerships in Europe, Energy Saving Performance Contracting, Multi‐technical and multi‐service management and maintenance of buildings and real estate property and innovations especially in the environmental management of buildings, New forms of cooperation between construction‐sector players: investors, contracting authorities, designers, companies, managers of new buildings, including the overall management of the supply chain and the analysis of new forms of organization for construction sites, The Technical direction is developing, improving and promoting the quality of the technical services dedicated to construction operators and provided by the technological departments, mainly: tests, assessments on construction products/processes/systems or certification. Complementary to research activities, these services support innovation. CSTB, acting as a trustworthy third party in the building industry, develops, capitalizes and makes available scientific and technical information to operators so that buildings and their environment provide solutions to sustainable development challenges. The Technical direction tasks are performed in close cooperation with the technological departments but also consist in coordination with and contribution to a wide range of networks.
follow …
37 15/09/2011
CENTRE SCIENTIFIQUE ET www.cstb.fr TECHNIQUE DU BATIMENT
suite … Its experts are active in many French, European and international networks; as examples, CSTB:
Is a member of the Agence Qualité Construction (AQC: French agency dedicated to damage prevention and quality improvement in the construction industry) and one of its partners in several projects, Is managing the Avis Technique procedure (technical assessment of construction systems), Is involved in the NF quality mark network (quality mark for global public), Is a member of AFOCERT (association of the French certification bodies in the construction industry), Is coordinating the common positions of the French Notified bodies under the CPD and is representing the French Notified bodies in the AG‐GNB (Advisory group of the group of notified bodies), Is a member of Eurocer‐Building (European association of certification bodies for products in buildings and works), Has been running for a while a standardization body, Is part of the management of the EOTA (European organization for technical approval). The IT department : As in all industrial sectors, data processing is an essential component of the quality, productivity and competitiveness of building and civil engineering professionals. Around Internet and associated communication technologies, the Information Technologies and Knowledge Dissemination Department (Technologies de l’Information et Diffusion du Savoir), provides construction economic players’ with services and expertise for innovation and productivity. The TIDS department combines the various teams involved in research, studies, development and knowledge dissemination, in order to better lead building construction professionals to the information society. Within the department, the information and software engineering has successfully driven several national projects related to technical approval information and product data publication, using recent interfaces and web technologies. The team has deep experience in document management (full text French regulation) and advanced databases (Afocert, Batibase, DPCnet, RPOPC, ...).
CSTB was joint partner with CEA in the Elios I pilot study.
38 15/09/2011
NATIONAL HOUSE BUILING www.nhbc.co.uk COUNCIL
The National House-Building Council is the independent non-profit distributing company established in the UK for the purpose of raising house-building standards and of protecting buyers of new or newly converted homes by means of home warranties and insurance. NHBC is now a leading warranty and insurance provider and standards setter for UK house-building for new and newly converted homes. NHBC is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.
The council NHBC’s governing Council has 62 members, representing stakeholders with an interest in raising standards in the UK house building. The members of NHBC’s Council include nominees from mortgage lenders, professional and trade bodies, consumer organisation and house builders together with two Buildmark warranty holders.
The Board of Directors Currently the Board comprises 15 members. The Chairman of the Board is also Chairman of the Audit, Consumer, Finance, Scottish and Standards Committees. There are four executive directors; NHBC’s Chief executive, the Commercial Director, the Finance Director and the Operations Director.
Over the past three years, the NHBC has carried out numerous services: Sustainability services, energy services, acoustic testing, air leakage testing, robust details, product sales, Quality management services, Land Quality Endorsement, Health and Safety, Training, Builder Home Emergency Assistance, Data Sales ( for Homeowner Home Emergency Assistance, Kitchen Appliance Protection, Key Care/ Key Finder and marketing lists), Customer Care Satisfaction Surveys, Information Products (Hometrack reports, Reports for HCA, Adhoc market reports), Housing Market Report.
For this study the NHBC would also seek to draw on the expertise of other organisations with which it has an established relationship, including the following :
NHBC Foundation (in Partnership with the BRE Trust). The NHBC Foundation exists to deliver huge quality research and practical guidance to help the industry meet its considerable sustainability and zero carbon challenges. Research has included a review of micro generation and renewable energy techniques and the ground breaking research on zero carbon and what it means to both house builders and homeowners. The NHBC Foundation, the research wing of NHBC, has undertaken a number of projects to analyse the current research and eco technologies which exist across the EU and the World. As a home warranty provider, it is in NHBC’s interests to ensure that the construction industry in the UK keeps up to date with all new research and eco technologies, sharing best practice resulting in higher quality homes and reducing risk associated with house building in the UK. www.nhbcfoundation.org follow …
39 15/09/2011
NATIONAL HOUSE BUILING www.nhbc.co.uk COUNCIL
suite …
Zero Carbon Hub. The Zero Carbon Hub is a joint venture between the UK construction industry and Government and is chaired by the UK Housing Minister. It was established to take on the day-to-day operational responsibility for co-ordinating the delivery of low and zero carbon homes. This is achieved by monitoring, co-ordinating and engaging organisations active in low and zero carbon homes. www.zerocarbonhub.org
IHHWA (International Housing and Home Warranty Association). The International Housing and Home Warranty Association (IHHWA) aims to promote the benefits of construction guarantees and warranties at an international level. The IHHWA brings together the following new home warranty bodies from across the world. EU Based Organisations: Forsakrings AB Bostadsgaranti (Sweden) Stichting Waaborgfonds Koopwoningen (The Netherlands) Woningborg (The Netherlands) Homebond (Ireland) AGEMI (France) CEA (France) NHBC (UK)
Non EU Members: Canadian Home Warranty Council (Canada) National Housebuilders Registration Council (South Africa) Association of Housing Warranty Insurers (Japan) http://ihhwa.com/
40 15/09/2011
HANNOVER RE www.hannover-re.com
Background
Hannover Re is one of the top leaders in decennial reinsurance in the world and the decennial reinsurance leader on the French market.
Paris office is the Center of Competence (CoC) for Inherent Defect Insurance for the entire group.
Hannover Re can rely on a very strong team of underwriters, both skilled and experienced with construction risk assessment.
Being a reinsurer, Hannover Re is in relation with all the players of the insurance market.
With a gross written premium of over EUR 11 billion, Hannover Re is one of the leading reinsurance groups in the world.
Hannover Re transacts all lines of non-life and life and health reinsurance and maintains business relations with more than 5,000 insurance companies in about 150 countries. Their worldwide network consists of more than 100 subsidiaries as well as branches and representative offices in around 20 countries with a total staff of roughly 2,000 worldwide.
The rating agencies most relevant to the insurance industry have awarded Hannover Re very strong insurer financial strength ratings (Standard & Poor's AA- "Very Strong" and A.M. Best A "Excellent").
A “Multi Specialist” with a global footprint
Non-Life Reinsurance
Best overall reinsurer USA 2004 and 2006*
No. 2 R/I in the Germany No. 2 P/C market
Marine (incl. energy) Leading XL reinsurer
Aviation One of the market leaders
No. 3 worldwide Credit, surety & political risks (neg. correlation to rest of P/C)
Global cat. XL business Dedicated cat. Writer
Global facultative business A truly global player
Advanced solutions Structured products for more than 25 years
* As voted in Flaspoehler survey follow …
41 15/09/2011
HANNOVER RE www.hannover-re.com
Suite …
In the two business groups, non-life and life/health reinsurance, Hannover concentrates on a number of strategically important and profitable lines of business. Traditional reinsurance business is complemented by innovative products. This strategy of diversification enables us to safeguard a positive overall result and a stable business development over the long term
Construction Risks
Construction insurance guarantees vary significantly depending on the country where they are defined and applied. In general, the insurance policies encountered fall into three main categories:
General liability policies (issued for each insured) These policies cover the liability of the construction company, the consultant engineer, the architect and design office in relation to their permanent scope of business. Work in progress policies (issued for each construction site) These policies cover primarily the works period against risks threatening the work whilst under construction. The same policies occasionally issue guarantees after acceptance which are known as "maintenance" guarantees. Guarantee policies after acceptance These policies are usually issued for constructed assets and are generally: Fire and explosion policies, Machinery breakdown policies, Owner's operations liability policies, Constructors' long-tail liability policies. Non-life department of Hannover Rückversicherung AG Succursale Française is the Center of Competence (Coc) for construction long-tail risks (mainly decennial) within the Hannover Re Group. Building on our core competence in the French market Hannover Re France is well informed and track developments in construction decennial insurance worldwide.
Hannover’s construction risk portfolio contains various kinds of buildings: dwellings, offices, hotels, factories, industrial estates, shops, shopping centres, public houses, leisure/entertainment facilities, public buildings, hospitals… and is participating on treaties from the smallest to the biggest one. Therefore the Hannover Re portfolio includes small risks as well as large ones.
Capacity for Construction Risks
Thanks to their expertise in construction techniques and our comprehensive knowledge of insurance techniques, Hannover Re is able to take the lead in French facultative and treaty business in 2007.
On the treaty side, portfolios and risks are closely analyzed and assessed before being underwritten; and on the facultative side, risks are technically closely analyzed before any underwriting.
Hannover Re is one of the top leaders in decennial reinsurance in the world and the decennial reinsurance leader on the French market. The Paris office is the Center of Competence (CoC) for Inherent Defect Insurance for the entire group. Hannover Re can rely on a very strong team of underwriters, both skilled and experienced with construction risk assessment. Being a reinsurer, Hannover Re is in relation with all the players of the insurance market.
42 15/09/2011
DANISH BUILDING RESEARCH www.bsf.dk/translation.aspx
INSTITUTE www.en.sbi.dk Danish Building Research Institute (Aalborg University) is the national building research institute in Denmark. SBi develops research-based knowledge to improve buildings and the built environment. The research and development at SBi focuses on the areas of Construction and Health, Energy and Environment and Towns, Housing and Properties.
Quality assurance instructions at SBi The Danish Building Research Institute (SBi), Aalborg University employs a four-stringed quality assurance system to ensure the quality of supplies and services: 1. Institutional quality assurance 2. Project management quality assurance 3. Accounting quality assurance 4. Academic quality assurance
Ad 1) Institutional quality assurance Performance contract SBi is subject to a four year agreement with the Danish Agency of Enterprise and Construction that provides a framework for carrying out research based public sector consultancy on construction and housing. The agreement is implemented in the form of annual performance contracts that stipulate measurable targets for supplies and services that are delivered to the authorities. Targets are established for among other things: – Research output (number of academic articles with peer review in journals and at conferences) – Degree of external funding – Number of public sector consultancy projects completed – Participation in research boards and councils – Publication sales – Number of visitors at different web solutions – Media appearances – Number of PhD-students – Contributions to dissemination events and workshops
All performance targets are evaluated annually to ensure continuous high quality and relevance of output.
follow …
43 15/09/2011
DANISH BUILDING RESEARCH www.bsf.dk/translation.aspx
INSTITUTE www.en.sbi.dk Suite … Research evaluation In addition to the annual performance contract, SBi is subject to external research assessments. These assessments are conducted at irregular intervals and are initiated by SBi’s steering committee to ensure that SBi delivers research of sufficient standard. In addition SBi is subject to AAUs general quality assurance strategy, which is implemented across all faculties and institutes. The previous research assessment was completed in 2010 by a panel of international researchers that studied and evaluated SBi's organisation, scientific performance and interaction with stakeholders. The panel concluded that SBi’s scientific standards generally are very acceptable. Input from the research assessment is used in the establishment of future performance targets as specified in the performance contract with the Danish Agency of Enterprise and Construction.
Ad 2) Project management quality assurance SBi’s project management quality assurance instructions contain rules for submission, approval and monitoring of projects. Pre-presentation Upcoming projects of over 1,000 hours and with an external financing, which is lower than 70 %, are submitted to the director as project sketches prepared by the project manager. Project sketches are presented as a short note with information about academic content, collaboration, funding and financing source. The director assesses whether there is a need for a discussion in the board of managers. In connection with major research programs, the management set up a group to be responsible for coordination of applications. Approval of new projects The head of department approves new projects less than 2,000 hours. New projects may be approved by the research director if they meet the following conditions: – Has less than 2,000 hours – The average external financing is higher than 70 % incl. the costs required for the production of reports and production facilities – Not result in hiring new employees. There may be engaged student who is 100 % externally funded by prior examination of whether there is spare capacity elsewhere in the department who can / should do the job.
Approval must take into account the department's overall economy. Other projects are approved by the director. follow …
44 15/09/2011
DANISH BUILDING RESEARCH www.bsf.dk/translation.aspx
INSTITUTE www.en.sbi.dk Suite … SBi's steering committee is informed about projects that are larger than 1,000 hours, or have significant strategic importance. Once projects are approved by the director/head of department, SBi's steering committee is oriented in accordance with "Practical routines for handling projects" (internal instruction located on the Intranet). The board of managers is informed monthly on projects approved since the last meeting. Monitoring projects The project manager must regularly, at least once a month, follow up the project's momentum versus time consumption. If there are signs of essential deviations from the project's planned course, this is discussed with the head of department. The project manager has to follow up on project economics at least once a month. If there are signs that the project limits will be exceeded or that the project will be expanded, the head of department is immediately informed. Changes in the project budget, within the approved project grant, shall be made by the project agreement with the head of department. Revision of the project framework can be approved by the head of department, if the project's revised budget conforms to the rules governing working hours and the average external financing. If the change results in exceeding one of the parameters of the terms, it must be approved by the director. The review should take into account the institute’s overall economy. The head of department can approve the transfer of unexpected outlays to working hours, travels, outside contractors and student hours. The opposite movement has to be agreed with the director. When an extension of projects is approved by the head of department/director, SBi's steering committee is advised in accordance with "Practical routines for handling projects" (instructions located on the Intranet). The management group is informed monthly on revisions. Completion of projects Academic achievements: At the request of the project manager, the research project can be closed 2 weeks after publication of the report. Any residual activity on the project from the Communication Department must be financed by the department itself. Financial statement: The accounts receivable clerk prepares the accounting figures for the final project report, when all activities are closed, all income received and all expenses incurred. The final project report is approved by the director. After approval the board is in accordance with "Practical routines for handling projects" (internal instruction located on the Intranet).
follow …
45 15/09/2011
DANISH BUILDING RESEARCH www.bsf.dk/translation.aspx
INSTITUTE www.en.sbi.dk Suite … Ad 3) Accounting quality assurance SBi’s financial accounting system is governed by an extensive set of accounting instructions that are the rules to be followed by institute staff in performing accounting tasks. The instructions contain detailed description of the accounting organization and the organization of the institute’s accounting functions, including information about the responsibilities and powers of the individual tasks. The accounting activities and procedures are audited by an external accountant, both when it comes to the general procedures and when it comes to the individual projects. Ad 4) Academic quality assurance The academic quality assurance is conducted at several levels. Every project, except for the smallest ones, is manned with at least two researchers to ensure integrity in research methods and conclusions. In addition, 6 % of a project’s budget is allocated to supervision by a peer or senior member of the research staff. All reports that are published through SBi’s own publishing house (SBi Forlag) are subjected to a peer-review process. From 2010, SBi Forlag has been recognised by The Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation on their official list of publishers whose publications are acknowledged in the national bibliometric research indicator. The majority of other research publications are peer-reviewed externally for publication in conference proceedings or research journals.
46 15/09/2011
ARCADIS / PRC www.arcadis.com
ARCADIS is one of the largest, global, knowledge-driven service providers, active in the fields of building, environment, infrastructure and communication. It serves clients from private and public sectors on feasibility study, design, engineering, project management, policy making and implementation. ARCADIS has affiliates in several European countries. The department Strategic Advice within ARCADIS Netherlands (formerly: PRC B.V.) is recognized as leading in the field of building regulations, sustainable construction and construction market research. We have been involved in major projects, programmes and surveys, dealing with the quality of buildings and building products, building pathology and sustainable construction.
PRC Bouwcentrum International (‘PRCBI’), the international label of the department Strategic Advice, is frequently appointed for specialist consultancy by the European Commission, the Dutch Ministry of the Environment (VROM) and trade organisations on the field of building regulations, construction quality/risk management and CE Marking. In 2006/2007 PRCBI has evaluated the economic effects of the Construction Products Directive for the European Commission. In 2010/2011 they did the study ‘Screening of national building regulations on sustainable construction, in the framework of the Lead Market Initiative Sustainable Construction, also for the European Commission. Besides, PRC Bouwcentrum has extensive experience in European research and EC studies on construction matters like Industrialized Flexible Demountable Building (IFD) and sustainable building.
The staff of PRCBI includes several members with experience in the world of regulators, such as former Government employees and former employees of approval and certification bodies. At present they still have contacts on a regular basis with members of the Standing Committee for Construction products, approval and notified bodies and manufacturers. They are also active in the field of standardisation and technical approvals.
Relevant skills PRC Bouwcentrum International has extensive knowledge of liabilities of construction actors, certification, quality and risk management in the construction process, building pathology and sustainability/innovation in construction.
We bring the following relevant skills and strengths to the proposed work: experience and understanding of all aspects of national and international construction; experience and expertise in innovation/sustainability; experience and expertise in building regulation, CE-marking, certification and quality marks, and the relationship with innovation and insurance; experience and expertise in building pathology; good contacts in, and access to, European stakeholders within public and private organisation and construction firms, and to European affiliates of ARCADIS; follow …
47 15/09/2011
ARCADIS / PRC www.arcadis.com
Suite …
knowledge, experience and contacts in a range of European government departments and agencies; experience of working with European and international institutions; comprehensive data handling and analysis capabilities; and excellent report-writing and presentation skills.
Language capabilities and regional presence The members of the proposed PRCBI-team are fluent in English, and most of them are in command of the German language and have a basic command of the French language. They are used to work in an international setting.
For the other EU-countries PRCBI wants to collaborate with the national affiliates of ARCADIS. Besides this network, PRCBl has long-lasting relations with consultancy firms throughout Europe within UICB and the ECCREDI/ENBRI-network. By this, we expect to have a network of experts which will cover most of the EU-27 Member States. This European network will also ease contacting SME’s and other stakeholders and having interviews in the national languages in for example the Nordic or East- European regions.
Reference projects Annexed is a list of our services which are relevant for this project.
In compliance with our Management Quality System (ISO 9001) all our projects are reviewed with the client after completion. This means that it is not customary that our clients to supply a certificate of satisfactory execution. Upon request names of our contact persons can be provided
48 15/09/2011
BELGIAN BUILDING www.bbbri.be RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Status & mission
The Belgian Building Research Institute is a private research institute founded in 1960 under impulse of the National Federation of Belgian Building Contractors in application of the so-called “De Groote” decree law of 1947. Specifically, this decree-law named after the former Minister of Economic Affairs aimed at promoting applied research in industry in order to improve its competitiveness. In application of this law the statutory contributing members of BBRI are the more than 65 000 Belgian construction companies (general contractors, carpenters, glaziers, plumbers, roofers, floorers, plasterers, painters, etc...) most of which are SMEs.
According to its statutes BBRI has the following three main missions:
to perform scientific and technical research for the benefit of its members to supply technical information, assistance and consultancy to its members to contribute in general to innovation and development in the construction sector in particular by performing contract research upon request of the industry and the authorities.
To fulfil its mission BBRI pools on the expertise of some 200 highly skilled and motivated staff members with widely varying education, allowing as such to set up multidisciplinary teams as required by the problems to be dealt with.
RESEARCH
Research programmes at BBRI are in general initiated and monitored by Technical Commissions bringing together all the relevant stakeholders, i.e. contractors, material producers, authorities, designers, architects, consultants, universities etc… . Where necessary, research alliances are set up nationally and internationally with universities and other research centres. In addition to own industrial BBRI members contributions, research is supported by: The European Commission, The Federal Ministry, The Communities and Regions (Flanders, Wallonia, Brussels).
Research is concentrated on practical work yielding direct results for the members. The field of research activities is quite large and in fact touches upon all essential requirements for building works, i.e. mechanical resistance and stability, health and environment, safety in use, acoustics, energy economy and heat retention. Expertise is grouped in different research departments, divisions and laboratories covering aspects such as structural design, soil mechanics, execution techniques, construction materials, façade technology, environmental issues, renovation, recycling, technical equipment, automation, building physics, lighting, heating, internal climate, building chemistry and information and communication technologies. Almost all laboratories are accredited (ISO 17025 BELTEST Certificate Nr. 054-T) and/or have been notified to the European Commission as test laboratories working in the framework of the construction products directive (89/106/CEE).
follow …
49 15/09/2011
BELGIAN BUILDING www.bbbri.be RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Suite …
Information
Information and technology transfer is another core activity of BBRI.
Direct transfer from research results to practice is assured through individual contacts by a team of technological advisors who are active in specific specialised niches, such as concrete repair, renovation, concrete technology, acoustics, glazing, window frames, heating, … Technical information notes elaborating on good practise, and a quarterly journal addressing ongoing research and evolutions are highly valued standard publications of the institute. These are made available to subscribing members either on paper or in electronic format. Over 450 conferences, seminars, workshops and specific training sessions on specific topics are organised each year. Winter courses allow practitioners to invest in permanent professional education.
Problem solving advice and technical assistance to building contractors is assured by a dedicated team of specialists who deal with over 40 000 questions each year and are standby to deliver their expert view by phone/fax or during on site visits and in dedicated reports. This service which is restricted solely to members is not only a much appreciated service for the members but also an inspiring source for pinpointing research needs.
Development and innovation
With the specific aim of developing new technologies and innovative products, contract research and approval services are offered by BBRI. BBRI is indeed one of the main partners in the Belgian approval body (UBAtc) and consequently also collaborates actively in the development of pan-European approval activities (UEAtc and EOTA). By closely following up the construction standardisation activities it is furthermore assured that the sector is kept up-to-date with the latest developments on a national (NBN), European (CEN) and even on an international level (ISO).
Through the Belgian Construction Certification Association (BCCA), the BBRI aims at ensuring that high quality products are available on the construction market in Belgium. This implies that BBRI invests as well in the further development of the national quality marks (Benor and ATG), the mandatory European conformity marking (CE) and the European voluntary quality marking (Keymark).
follow …
50 15/09/2011
BELGIAN BUILDING www.bbbri.be RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Suite …
European & international networking
BBRI has been a founding member of the European Network of Building Research Institutes – ENBRI (http://www.enbri.org) and the European Council for Construction Research, Development and Innovation – ECCREDI (http://www.eccredi.org). BBRI is in fact also running the executive secretariat for both associations.
Furthermore, BBRI is managing quite a number of organisations and European Thematic Networks such as:
INIVE – International Network for Information on ventilation (http://www.inive.org)
PRESCO – European Network on Practical Recommendations for Sustainable Construction (http://go.to/presco.net)
FIT – Fire in Tunnels Network (http://www.etnfit.net)
E-CORE – European Construction Research network (http://www.e-core.org)
PASLINK – European Network of Outdoor Testing (http://www.paslink.org)
EUROKOBRA – Hygrothermal Analysis of Thermal Bridges (www.eurokobra.org)
Next to this activity in networks, BBRI is present as research partner in over 20 European funded research projects. All this assures that BBRI is in a good position to stay an important player in the European Construction Research Area.
International liaison is assured through amongst others:
CIB - International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (http://www.cibworld.nl)
FIB - International Federation for Structural Concrete (http://fib.epfl.ch)
RILEM - International Association for Building Materials and Structures (http://www.rilem.org)
UICB - International Union of Building Centres (http://www.uicb.org)
51 15/09/2011
TECHNICAL TEST INSTITUTE www.tzus.cz FOR CONSTRUCTION
Description of the organisation: Technical Test Institute for Construction Prague was established by the Ministry of Industry and Trade and works as a typical non-profit organisation. TZUS Prague is the biggest test and certification house in the Czech Republic. As a Notified Body 1020, TZUS is responsible for representation of CR in relevant GNBs and for any co-ordination in the field of the conformity assessment of construction products. TZUS Prague is also authorized to issue of European Technical Approvals and is a spokesman body for the Czech Republic in the European Organisation for Technical Approvals. TZUS is also member of the following organisations : EOTA, GNBCPD, ENBRI, UEAtc, WFTAO, ECTP, E2B, SB Alliance, CZGBC, ECI ICE, Eurolab, IQnet. Previous experience relevant to those tasks: TZUS Prague has 55 years of experience on the market with practically all kinds of construction products and building technologies. For the last ten years it was involved in a systematic review of existing building stock and research work focused on specification of most common failures of different types of panel houses. Based on these findings TZUS assisted in developing comprehensive methodology and manuals for repairs, maintenance and refurbishing of this voluminous stock of social housing. TZUS is also very active in certification of products and kits used by installers involved in buildings’ renovation. The latest achievements are presented to public through media and TZUS conferences. The annual one for windows and doors attracts attention of approx. 800 attendees and a large number of the top European professionals. TZUS is a leading European WG for external thermo- insulation systems, acts as a certification body for energy labelling and sustainable buildings using localised system SB TOOLS-CZ. As a large institute with number of branches in various cities it operates robust ICT system and has strong capacity in programming and developing its own information technology solutions for in-house designed and produced unique technologies and data harvesting. The research work is currently devoted to building physics and masonry structures where TZUS experts chair standardisation committees including those for euro-codes.
52 15/09/2011
APAVE www.apave.com
Apave is in the risk control business and provides a complete range of technical and intellectual services in the areas of inspection, assistance, buildings, tests and measurements, training and consulting. It aims to improve the safety of personnel and assets, and to optimize the performance of organisations
APAVE specialises in : Construction technical inspection Health and Safety Protection Diagnostics and technical assistance Real estate diagnostics Technical checks : fire, heat.. High Environmental Quality Project ownership assistance
Through its 40 establishments and subsidiaries in Africa, Asia, the Near and Middle East, the Indian Ocean islands and Europe, Apave is expanding into growing international markets: nuclear, oil/gas, major industrial infrastructures, civil engineering, construction, etc.
53 15/09/2011
8.2. Organisation chart A governance structure will be established for an effective project direction and management, as it is showed in the next figure
54 15/09/2011
9. A plan of action with description of activities and their timing
9.1. Work package deliverables list
DELIVERABLES PARTICIPANTS WP1- Directory on quality / conformity marks 1.1 Collection of information on quality/conformity marks in BBRI, CSTB, PRC, TZUS construction markets for products, processes, works, technical equipment, professional qualifications 1.2 Critical analysis on the relevance of the information provided by BBRI, CSTB, PRC, TZUS quality marks 1.3 Appraisal of modalities to follow to access to quality marks BBRI, CSTB, PRC, TZUS 1.4 Assessment of the impact of the quality marks on the BBRI, CSTB, PRC, competitiveness of construction businesses 1.5 Assessment of the use of quality marks by the insurance sector BBRI, CSTB, PRC 1.6 Specification of characteristics of an internet platform for diffusion BBRI, CSTB of the directory 1.7 Development of a EU directory on quality/conformity marks CSTB, Alten accessible on Internet WP2- Indicators and monitoring of quality and pathology 2.1 State of the art on quality in construction and building pathology Arcadis/PRC, CSTB, BBRI, NHBC, SBI 2.2 Needs and criteria to develop an EU-wide database on quality and Arcadis/PRC, CSTB, BBRI, pathology indicators NHBC, SBI 2.3 Format, informatics requirements Arcadis/PRC, CSTB, SBI 2.4 Developing, testing and validating the pilot database Arcadis/PRC, CSTB, SBI 2.5 Pilot database operational Arcadis/PRC, CSTB 2.6 Updating the database CSTB, Alten WP3- Insurance schemes 3.1 Update of the mapping of insurance regimes in the EU-27 made in Hannover Re ,CEA ELIOS pilot project 3.2 Review of different mechanisms that exist to protect investors’ Apave interests 3.3 Information needs about construction insurance Apave / Hannover Re 3.4 State of the art of insurance schemes in the EU-27 and transition SBi paths 3.5 Analysis of conditions for greater mutual recognition of CEA and SBi construction insurance regimes 3.6 Recommendations for policy formulation Hannover Re
55 15/09/2011
DELIVERABLES PARTICIPANTS WP4- Dissemination of data 4.1 Establish forum SBi 4.2 Forum meeting 1 - 7 SBi, leaders of WP 4.3 Newsletters NHBC 4.4 News article CEA 4.5 Press release CEA 4.6 Publish final report CEA, SBi 4.7 Update and revise Elios Website SBI, CSTB Management Activities WP5. Project management 5.1 Management and administration of the project CEA, leaders of WP 5.2 Coordination of Work packages CEA,NHBC 5.3 Animation and coordination of activities of associated bodies CEA, leaders of WP 5.4 Assistance to the Commission CEA 5.5 Research reports CEA 5.6 Exchanging with the Commission on the reports submitted CEA
56 15/09/2011
9.2. Distribution of financial resources between project participants
CEA CSTB Arcadis Hannover Re SBI Alten NHBC BBRI Apave TZUS
57 15/09/2011
9.3. Work planning and timetable M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Support Activities WP1- Directory on quality / conformity marks 1.1 Collection of information on quality/conformity marks in construction markets for products, processes, works, technical equipment, professional qualifications 1.2 Critical analysis on the relevance of the information provided by quality marks 1.3 Appraisal of modalities to follow to access to quality marks 1.4 Assessment of the impact of the quality marks on the competitiveness of construction businesses 1.5 Assessment of the use of quality marks by the insurance sector 1.6 Specification of characteristics of an internet platform for diffusion of the directory 1.7 Development of a EU directory on quality/conformity marks accessible on Internet
58 15/09/2011
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 WP2- Indicators and monitoring of quality and pathology 2.1 State of the art on quality in construction and building pathology 2.2 Needs and criteria to develop an EU- wide database on quality and pathology indicators
2.3 Format, informatics requirements
2.4 Developing, testing and validating the pilot database
2.5 Pilot database operational
2.6 Updating the database
WP3- Insurance schemes 3.1 Update of the mapping of insurance regimes in the EU-27 made in ELIOS pilot project 3.2 Review of different mechanisms that exist to protect investors’ interests 3.3 Information needs about construction insurance 3.4 State of the art of insurance schemes in the EU-27 and transition paths 3.5 Analysis of conditions for greater mutual recognition of construction insurance regimes 3.6 Recommendations for policy formulation
59 15/09/2011
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 WP4- Dissemination of data
4.1 Establish forum
4.2 Forum meeting 1 - 7
4.3 Newsletters
4.4 News article
4.5 Press release
4.6 Publish final report
4.7 Update and revise Elios Website
Management Activities WP5. Project management 5.1 management and administration of the project
5.2 coordination of Work packages
5.3 Animation and coordination of activities of associated bodies
5.4 Assistance to the Commission
5.5 Research reports
5.6 Exchanging with the Commission on the reports submitted
60 15/09/2011
9.4. Work package descriptions WP1
Work package number 1 Start date Month 1
Activity Type Elaboration of EU directory on quality / conformity marks
Description: To develop an EU directory on quality / conformity marks (labels, certificates, technical assessments, etc.) for construction products, processes, works, technical equipment and professional qualifications, Objectives: The overall objective of this part of the work is: to provide impartial and reliable information on the opportunities and threats of quality/conformity marks that could support risk appraisal by (re)insurers, in a way compatible with Internal Market objectives. The specific objectives of WP1 are: to highlight the variety of the usage and added value of these marks in the EU-27 countries so as to allow a better understanding of similarities and differences between local approaches; to reduce information asymmetry between EU construction producers (any actor developing goods and services) and users (such as e.g., home owners, investors, authorities, ..), taking into account the increasingly regulatory role of the (re)insurance sector in the assessment of risks; to help identifying compatibility and complementary issues with the CE marking; to assess the impact of the quality/conformity marks on the competitiveness of the construction industry and on the practices of the insurance sector; to make this information accessible on Internet.
Rationale: As a project-based industry, construction is characterised by a supply-chain involving several actors temporarily working together on project-specific tasks. An incorrect assessment of key actors or key elements integrated in the building will result in a poor result. To assure the quality of construction, in each EU country a set of marks or any kind of (technical) information is developed. This is often presented in a well organised, known and efficient way, according to the specific national regulatory/responsibility context, the predominant local construction techniques and organisations, and adapted to the local culture, climate, and knowledge. On-going long-term processes such as European standardisation favour a better understanding and communication between involved parties. The pre-normative work which is carried out for several decades by EOTA and UEAtc or some certification bodies, also contributes to this evolution. Nevertheless, a lot has still to be done. Moreover, as any other industrial sector, the construction industry is not static so that marks have to change to adapt to new techniques, customers and market demands. In such a context certification procedures, quality marks and signs will help identifying the competences of the actors of the construction value chain and they will inform the users about the quality of products / works / technical equipments.
61 15/09/2011
Description of the work 1. Commission Tender Specifications This work package includes the following components, inter alia, according to the Commission’s tender specifications (p. 5): An inventory of quality/conformity marks in all EU-27 countries used in construction markets for products, processes, works, technical equipment and professional qualifications together with an appraisal of the level of impartiality of the procedures that are used to deliver the quality marks; A critical analysis of the rationale and of the relevance of the information provided by the quality marks to the operators of the construction value chain and to investors, including the compatibility and complementary issues with the CE marking; An appraisal of the conditions and of modalities to be followed by construction operators in order to access to the quality/conformity marks, including those related to the mutual recognition of the marks by Member States; An assessment of the possible impact of the quality/conformity marks on the competitiveness of construction businesses and the functioning of the Internal Market; Evidence and assessment of the extent to which the quality/conformity marks are used in practice by the insurance sector, including in the context of cross-border services. The assessment will consider possible constraints on the Internal Market resulting from common practice in insurance. The contractor will develop an EU directory on quality/conformity marks covering the above- mentioned aspects (i.e. their scope by product, process, works, etc., their relationship with the EC marking, their modalities, etc.) and accessible on Internet. The main recipients of this directory are professional services providing expertise and advice to construction operators, investors and (re)insurance.
2. Proposed Response to the Tender Specifications WP1 is divided in three tasks and seven deliverables.
Task 1.1: Inventory of quality / conformity marks (labels, certificates, technical assessments, etc) in all EU-27 countries used in construction markets for construction products, processes, construction works, technical equipments, construction systems, professional qualification or services leading to the quality of buildings
Objectives The objective of this task is to determine: a complete set of types of quality/conformity marks; Explanation Marks covering aspects such as safety, conformity and environment can be identified.
Sustainable development perspectives boosted the dynamism of the construction sector and sustainability marks’ have been flourishing during the last decade. Besides traditional actors of
62 15/09/2011 the marking business (certification bodies, notified bodies, public institutes...) a lot of local initiatives can be identified. They are often based on national frames of references and are generally developed to support local construction development.
the status and position of the different types of marks on the local and European market, in the global quality chain for construction: mandatory, semi-mandatory, voluntary, background (legal, market driven), third party involved, underlying guarantee schemes, acceptance;
Explanation: Status of marks : Marks can be either mandatory or voluntary. Mandatory by definition means by legislation. Some marks represent a legal requirement for the supplier. These marks usually cover safety or fitness for a (general) use of a construction product or service. The circumstances in which the mark is to be placed or used are detailed in the legislation. Market surveillance of goods/actors bearing such marks is conducted by governmental agencies or delegated by them to competent bodies. Most marks found in the construction business however, are voluntary and have no specific legal status (although in some countries they have a strong legal status coming from the Consumers Code). Manufacturers or construction companies use voluntary marks to raise the trust and confidence of consumers and commercial purchasers in order to convince them that a product or their services will fulfil their expectations. Voluntary marks may be owned by a third-party certifier which licenses their use on approved products/processes. Governmental marks can sometimes be voluntary when these are set out in codes of practice, guidelines etc. A governmental certification scheme may lay down legal and administrative provisions but it may be entirely optional for individual suppliers/manufacturers to adopt the scheme.
‘Acceptance’ of a voluntary mark. The acceptance of a voluntary mark, by consumers or by the authorities, depends on the trust, image, awareness and integrity of the certification organisation or scheme. Usually the integrity of the mark and, accordingly, confidence in the product that bears the mark, is enhanced by independent product testing and certification of quality management systems. Some voluntary marks, however, are effectively endorsed by the government (e.g. Spanish N-mark), or by insurers (NF mark for construction products used in works with decennial insurance) or mortgage lenders (e.g. UK’s NHBC scheme for new housing). Some are funded and promoted by the government (e.g. UK Buildmark for small builders’ work). Some voluntary marks are part of a product or works guarantee scheme underwritten by insurance, which provides compensation in case of a defect, but others offer no more real protection than the general product liability legislation.
Method Based on an enquiry format to be defined by the experts from the partner organizations, the project partners will mobilise their networks covering the EU-27 (see appendix 1) to inventory the relevant quality/conformity marks leading to the quality of buildings: labels, certificates, technical assessments, etc, for construction products, technical equipments, construction systems, construction works, professional qualification or services …
Multiple information sources will be used by partners: web, electronic exchange, person-to- person contacts or face-to-face interviews. A detailed list of these sources will be supplied during the first month after contract signature; A network of actors identified by the ELIOS II consortium (cf. list in annex 1) will be contacted to gather the required information.
63 15/09/2011
Outcomes This data collection will result in a report (D 1.1) identifying and positioning the different types of quality/conformity marks or signs in the global quality chain for building considering the local and EU-regulatory context and building practices, their status and position on the local and EU- construction market This report will serve the further analysis and activities described in the following tasks.
Task 1.2 The contextual framework of quality / conformity marks Objective: Data collected through T1.1 are factual elements that need to be set by in a context.
The objective of task T1.2 is twofold: 1. provide contextual elements to add value to the information collected in T1.1 2. provide a socio-economic analysis in order to better understand the use of quality/conformity marks by the insurance business and to appraise their impacts on the construction business as a whole.
Method: Firstly the analysis will be based on a literature survey dealing with standards, quality assurance, third-party certification, information asymmetry. This survey will examine approaches developed in other sectors such as the agro-food, the automobile, communication networks. This survey will provide the consortium with information on the impact of 3rd party control and certification systems on the quality of construction, and the competitiveness of an industry.
Then this will be used to present a critical analysis of the rationale of the information provided by quality marks in the construction industry. Secondly key construction actors (designers, contractors, suppliers of equipments and products, public and private clients, organisations delivering quality marks, insurance companies, health and safety enforcement bodies, facility managers…) will be interviewed to assess: 1. the relevance of the information provided (D1.2); 2. the conditions to follow to get access to quality marks (D1.3); 3. the impact of the quality marks on the competitiveness of the industry and the functioning of the Internal Market (D1.4); 4. the use of quality marks by the insurance sectors (D1.5). A two steps approach will be developed: 1. An electronic survey will be sent to key stakeholders in selected countries; 2. Face to face / phone interviews with construction practitioners and insurer representatives will be held. Both the electronic survey and the structure of the questionnaire used for the interviews will be based on the aforementioned literature survey and information gathered in task 1.1.
Outcomes: D1.2 and D1.3 will be used to develop the EU directory on quality / conformity marks that will become accessible on the Internet. It will complete the inventory (D1.1). The aim will be to make the professional users (operators of the construction value chain and investors) of the directory, aware of the context in which information is produced.
64 15/09/2011
D1.4 and D1.5 will inform the operators of the construction value chain, investors, insurers, governmental bodies about the impact of quality / conformity marks on the competitiveness of the industry and the functioning of the Internal market.
Task 1.3 Internet platform - Development of an EU directory on quality/conformity marks
Objective The directory will not just be a list of presently available quality marks as Internet platform/windows linking Web-pages. We aim to provide an added-value directory that allows operators of the construction value chain and investors to grasp differences between marks concerning “similar” domains through an Internet platform. For instance, marks related to masonry walls may concern concrete or clay blocks but these marks may not concern the same characteristics in different countries. Marks concerning qualifications of contractors may also be different in terms of requirements, marking process, validity duration. Based on the results from task 1.1, report (D1.1) positioning the different types of quality/conformity marks or signs in the global quality chain for building considering the local context, an EU directory on quality/conformity marks will be developed considering aspects such as: subject/scope (by product, process, works, technical equipment and professional qualifications), status (mandatory/semi-mandatory/voluntary), operated scheme (accreditation/independence, involvement of stakeholders’ interests defining the requirements, scheme/methodology/approach…), concerned characteristics, level of acceptance on the market
Method All the information necessary for a critical analysis of the rationale and of the relevance of the information provided by the quality/conformity marks to the operators of the construction value chain and to investors, including the compatibility and complementary issues with the CE marking shall be considered. That framework will serve the development of an Internet enquiry associated to / filling in a database that will be developed for the characterisation of quality/conformity marks. Prior to the web platform implementation, a specific session of the European Stakeholders representatives will be devoted to the platform specifications definition. These specifications will be reported in deliverable D1.6. Project partners will through their networks and the identified relevant stakeholders’ representatives make a large advertising communication (Emailing), inviting service providers of quality/conformity marks to fill in the database via the Internet access; completed database is deliverable D1.7. Results from task T1.2, i.e. critical analysis of the rationale and of the relevance of the information provided by the quality marks to the operators in the global quality chain for building considering the local context, in the form of a synthetic contextual character will also be proposed (as a summary presentation on the context). The objective is to make as clear and complete as possible the understanding of the marks contribution. This database could serve through Internet technology a consultation with immediate
65 15/09/2011 comparison of the characterisation criteria for some (up to …) quality/conformity marks. In a first step this consultation will be restricted to the project partners’ experts. Later, and after validation with stakeholders, it could be opened as professional services providing expertise and advice to construction operators, investors and (re)insurance.
Results The availability of this database is deliverable D 1.7.
Deliverables D1.1: Inventory of quality / conformity marks in all EU-27 countries used in construction D1.2: Critical analysis of the rationale and of the relevance of the information provided by the quality marks D1.3: Modalities to follow to get access to quality / conformity marks D1.4: Impact of quality marks on the quality of construction and the competitiveness of construction business and the functioning of the Internal Market D1.5: Use of quality / conformity marks by the insurance sector D1.6: Definition of the specifications of the platform
D1.7: Development of an EU directory on quality/conformity marks accessible on Internet.
Risk management Typical risks for this Work Package are:
- Willingness of marks operators There is potential risk that some service providers remain silent or do not join the approach. The mitigating solution could consist in a large dissemination of data and valorisation of the quality marks directory to stimulate interest in the approach among the stakeholders. - Reliability of information Service providers will remain responsible for the information they introduce and for keeping them updated. - Language issue When available, in English, original information will be supplied. When only available in local language, it will be necessary to mobilise the network of the partners of the project to translate it.
Resources The tasks of WP1 will be carried out by BBRI, CSTB, PRC and TZUS. Each partner will cover a specific geographical area according to his network so as to cover the EU-27 countries.
66 15/09/2011
Contribution of consortium partners to the tasks of WP1
Delivera Tasks Partners Period/Delivery date bles
To gather information on quality / conformity marks in construction From month 1 to month 9 BBRI, CSTB, PRC, D1.1 markets for products, processes, works, TZUS technical equipment, professional Month 9 qualifications
To develop a critical analysis on the From month 6 to month 18 BBRI, CSTB, PRC, D1.2 relevance of the information provided TZUS by quality marks Month 18 From month 9 to month 21 To appraise the modalities to follow to BBRI, CSTB, PRC, D1.3 access to quality marks TZUS Month 21
To assess the impact of quality marks on From month 12 to month 24 D1.4 the competitiveness of construction BBRI, CSTB, PRC, businesses Month 24 From month 18 to month 30 To assess how the insurance sector uses D1.5 BBRI, CSTB, PRC quality marks Month 30 From month 18 to month 21 To specific the characteristics of the D1.6 BBRI, CSTB platform Month 21
To development an EU directory on From month 21 to month 36 D1.7 quality/conformity marks accessible CSTB on Internet Month 36
67 15/09/2011
WP2
Work package number 2 Start date or starting event Month 1
Activity Type Indicators and monitoring of quality and pathology
Description: To develop an EU-wide knowledge base on quality indicators in construction and building pathology Objectives: The overall objective of this part of the study is to provide reliable information on the opportunities (and threats) of building pathology that could support risk appraisal by (re)insurance. The specific objectives are: To develop indicators and a mechanism to monitor the evolution of quality in construction and the pathology related to construction design techniques and the integration of eco-technologies To make this information available in a pilot database
Rationale: Building quality and building pathology In any sector of activity, the evaluation of risks associated to any project requires trustable information on qualifications of persons, products characteristics, process performances. All the involved economic agents (from designer to end-user/customer) are concerned with these issues. Quality /conformity marks are a well-developed way to provide such information. This information participates in the reduction of information asymmetry between economic agents. Of course, the information is never perfect and there remains uncertainty, the potential consequences of which can be covered by insurance. As a major sector of the economy, also the construction industry uses quality/conformity marks and has developed insurance schemes adapted to the context of construction projects. These marks are intended to cover a broad spectrum of topics including technical performances of construction products, kits, systems and technical equipment, conformity to normalised specifications, process organisation performances, professional qualifications, etc. Any construction project is unique: the construction industry is a project-based industry, not a mass-product industry. Each construction project results from the management during a limited period of time (few years typically) of skills and techniques implemented by a temporary team. The members of this construction team have different background and objectives and they generally do not all know each other. In each EU-27 country, the construction market is mainly local. Local predominant construction techniques vary according to countries. The roles and responsibilities of the main actors (designer/architect, contractors, manufacturer, etc.) are also different. The initial training and access to the profession differ from country to country. In this complex system, the development of quality/conformity marks as well as of insurance scheme is all but a straightforward process. Nevertheless, such developments are crucial to protect customers against the potential lack of quality of construction works. Building pathology is the appearance of such lack of quality. The causes of ‘building pathology’ can be very wide, coming from insufficient skills of or faults by actors during the development process or construction process, loose design, inadequate processes, defective building products, aging of building materials, imperfect implementation, etc. Pathology is created by all these imperfections, most of them resulting from human actions.
68 15/09/2011
The added value of a database on pathology would be to highlight these weak points.
Insurance of innovative sustainable construction solutions The regulatory environment strongly influences the role and responsibilities that the actors (including insurers) assume and how is being built. Regulations usually aim at preventing unacceptable risks from occurring. Insurance is a mean to transfer remaining risk. In the case of ‘conventional’ construction (which varies across countries, according to local construction techniques and practices), it is generally possible to insure the majority of risks, including the guarantee of performance (for example the water tightness of a roof). Problems arise, however, in the case of innovative construction technology (of which sustainable construction technology is an example), owing to the lack of feedback of experience on such technology. Information on building pathology, on the prevention of recurring damage and on good practices is not centralised in Europe and is widely disseminated. Therefore this information is not easily accessible to players in the market and in particular to small and craft firms in the different countries. The absence of relevant scientific data is impeding the development of insurance cover for certain types of risk. It is currently difficult to obtain cover for the performance guarantee of innovative solutions, like eco-technologies. This leads to the conclusion that the construction sector and the insurance sector need reliable technical information which could support appropriate risk assessment and the development of preventive tools within the insurance industry and help the construction sector (and especially small and craft firms) to accelerate the development of innovation and enable it to learn more quickly from past experience. The insurance sector recognizes that the availability of such technical information could help to create a real competitive market in the cover of innovative construction techniques. In addition, the advantages of the technical data may be even larger for the insurance sector because the data may also be useful in other areas of insurance, such as fire risks, the risks of damage to property or health and safety risks. This justifies the creation of a European database on construction quality and building pathology which would make it possible to achieve an understanding of building pathology at the European level. Without such data it would not be possible to avoid the recurrence of certain damages or to prevent the use of high risk products. This knowledge base of building pathology, which requires in particular a careful monitoring of defects, is essential if progress is to be made in the matter of quality and in improvement of skills of all those involved in the construction process. It also constitutes an indispensable risk assessment tool for the insurers.
Description of the work 1. Commission Tender Specifications This work package includes the following components, inter alia, according to the Commission’s tender specifications (p. 6): A review of existing research work and data sources on quality in construction and building pathology, including an assessment of the value of the various sources, their complementary aspects and their potential for use in risk appraisal; An analysis of the needs and of the criteria to develop an EU-wide database on quality and pathology indicators, in particular the potential value of this information for the construction and the (re) insurance sectors, the conditions and the modalities to gather, exploit and disseminate relevant data and information to all parties concerned; the maintenance and the exploitation of the database after the termination of the pilot project, etc.; A validation of the format of the information that the EU-wide database should provide, e.g. by type of construction products, process, building, by category of defects, by regions, etc. and of
69 15/09/2011
relevant media support, e.g. webzine, publications, alert on major defects, etc. Based on the analysis and validation described above, the contractor will define the informatics requirements of the database. A pilot version of the database should be developed, tested and validated during the course of the pilot project. The contractor should ensure a regular updating of the data sources and maintenance of the informatics environment during the course of the pilot project.
2. Proposed Response to the Tender Specifications
Task 2.1 : State of the art on quality in construction and building pathology
Objective
With technical innovation in the field of eco-technology developing rapidly across the world, the role of monitoring in adopting these successfully implemented technologies is key. Any warranty, insurance or reinsurance scheme must be in a position to embrace these new technologies if they are to be implemented across the EU.
Method
To come to a successful database with which these technologies (including the pathology of these technologies) can be monitored a broader approach is needed, namely a consideration of construction quality and building pathology in general. How can we measure construction quality and building pathology? What are the indicators? How do we take local predominant construction techniques (varying across countries) into account? And: what is known about building pathology currently? This will be done in tasks T.2.1a (definition) and T.2.1b (review of existing research and data sources.
When we know what is the state of the art of construction quality and building pathology in general, we can narrow the subject and make this more concrete by focussing on building projects, processes etc where innovative eco-technologies have been used. We intend to select 10 eco-technologies with which we can demonstrate what is currently known about quality and pathology.
Outcome
As a deliverable of this phase, a report will be made on the basis of the information acquired, and some preliminary conclusions will be drawn on the state of the art of construction quality/building pathology in general, and of the 10 studied eco-technologies in particular.
Activities
Our activities during this phase will be the following:
T.2.1.a. Definition of construction quality and building pathology First we will develop a definition of ‘construction quality’ and ‘building pathology’ from a broad perspective (see above under ‘Rationale’), preferably by following international definitions (i.e. ISO standards). It should be noted that pathology feeds the development of the state-of-the-art, and therefore pathology varies over time. It is a ‘moving target’.
T.2.1b. Review of existing research work and data sources Secondly we will review existing research work and data sources on quality and building pathology by:
70 15/09/2011
Gathering relevant research work; Gathering relevant data sources; Reviewing and analysing research work and data sources on, amongst others on useful quality and pathology indicators.
Gathering of relevant research work and data sources will be carried out by means of a questionnaire and additional interviews and/or meetings. The organisations, which will be approached in the first instance to provide this data, are those for this Work Package (ARCADIS/PRC, NHBC, CSTB, BCCA, SBi-BSF), all of which have already agreed to participate. We will also collect information from a range of other organisations from across the sector (insurers, research institutes, governments etc.), using our network of contact persons and experts in EU-27.
Some examples of research work and data sources are the following. In the past several research organisations have made information on construction defects publically available, like the ‘Defect Action Sheets’ from BRE (UK), the ‘Fichas’ from the Spanish Intemac, or the ‘Defect Information Sheets’ from the Danish Building Research Institute. Some insurers (like Cornhill in the UK) have a database with 25 years of statistical information on product defects; but these kind of databases are probably not accessible publically. There are also some (semi-)public bodies in Europe, such as Agence Qualité de Construction in France or the Building Defects Fund in Denmark, which are responsible for construction pathology and for promoting construction quality.
T.2.1c. Selection of 10 eco-technologies The information gathered in the previous step is very broad, and embraces a large scope of building projects, construction technologies, processes, actors. In order get the subject more concrete we propose to select 10 examples of eco-technologies, to be used throughout this Work Package as ‘case study technologies’. Examples of such eco-technologies are: green roofs, photovoltaic cells, solar panels, heating pumps, district heating etc.; but It would be interesting to look also at the introduction of products which are now ‘traditional’ and were ‘ínnovative’ in the past. For these 10 technologies data will be collected on: projects where the technologies were applied; used construction technology and materials/products; construction process; building defects in connection with the technologies; organisational and quality aspects (skills, quality marks, professional qualifications); players in the market; etc. In the further phases of the study, the database on construction quality and building pathology will be developed around these 10 innovative technologies.
This WP2-group will use its experience and expertise in this area to effectively coordinate data collection of existing technologies in some EU-countries. Members of the WP2-group, for example NHBC, have previously worked on a project with the Zero Carbon Hub, a collaboration between the UK Government and a range of organisations from the UK construction industry to deliver the technologies which will ensure the UK reaches its carbon reduction targets. Part of this work was to research and analyse current technologies used across the world. NHBC then put together a compendium of a wide range of technologies used in 15 countries including eight EU members. Data will also be collected with EU members of IHHWA (International Housing and Home Warranty Association) and other organisations. We will collect data on the technologies used and pathology and rate their value, for example by looking at the following criteria: Technologies used to meet Members States’ regulations/standards: National Government Policies and measures in place to promote eco-technology
71 15/09/2011
building regulations energy certificates technologies used to deal with environment and climate in Member States Other technologies used without this minimum regulations/standard: inspirational standards innovative/Intelligent systems building envelope energy efficient equipment passive design low or Zero Carbon Technology
T.2.1.d. Assessment of the value of the existing research work, data sources On the basis of the collected information in the activities T.2.1.b. and c., we will assess this information on a number of criteria, like: useful quality and pathology indicators informative value potential use for risk appraisal or other purposes (like building control) complementary aspects
T.2.1.e. Report 1 As a deliverable of this phase, a report will be made on the basis of the information acquired, and some preliminary conclusions will be drawn.
T.2.2. Needs and criteria to develop an EU database on quality and pathology indicators
Objective
The aim is to develop a database which monitors eco technologies, the pathology and quality of construction from across the EU, and its implication for insurance and risk management. It will be vital to work with (re)insurance companies to determine what evidence is required before eco- technologies can be covered by their warranties, and to identify the key factors and develop key indicators which will be needed to inform their internal decision making processes. It will also be important to engage the construction sector to identify their needs and any logistical or technical issues related to the design of a database.
Given that the quality of construction and eco technologies varies widely across the EU, with some countries making more progress than others, a mechanism or ‘tool’ for sharing information is imperative. This will inevitably drive up quality and standards reduce risk and positively impact on the insurance and re-insurance in this sector.
Method
The method to inventory the needs and criteria is to organize panel discussions with representatives of the (re)insurance and construction sector (T.2.2.a). This leads to a ‘program of requirements’ for the database to be developed (T.2.2b).
Outcome
The outcome of this task is a report the findings of the panel discussions (T.2.2.c).
Activities
Our activities in this phase will be the following:
72 15/09/2011
T.2.2.a. An analysis of the needs and of the criteria to develop an EU-wide database on quality and pathology indicators.
For this, panel discussions will be organised, with representatives from the (re)insurance sector, building control bodies, construction companies, technical assessment institutes etc., to discuss the needs and criteria to develop an EU-wide database on construction quality and pathology. Subjects to be discussed are amongst others: The need and the potential value for such a database for the construction and (re)insurance sectors; The criteria which should be fulfilled for the database to be successfully used; Information to be gathered (type of construction products, processes, buildings, category of defects, by regions); Possibility to make analyses possible in the future (statistics, correlation with marks, etc) ; Relevant media support, e.g. website, publications, alert on major defects, etc.; Possibility to engage an exchange of information between EU-parties (forum); The conditions and the modalities to gather, exploit and disseminate relevant data and information to all parties concerned (for example logistical/technical issues); Maintenance and exploitation of the database after the termination of the pilot project.
With regard to the information to gathered for each technology, one could think of the following aspects: The development of sustainable technologies in EU Member States; Risks of new technologies (defects, damage, non-performance, etc.); Benefits and drawbacks according to both the industry and the (re)insurance sector; The reaction to new technologies from the insurance side; what evidence is required from insurers before eco technologies can be covered by their warranties – identification of key factors and development of key indicators; The measures in place to manage any risk; Cost benefit analysis of purchasing warranty cover for eco-technologies.
T.2.2.b. ‘Program of requirements’ for the pilot database On the basis of the findings of the panel discussions a ‘program of requirements’ for the pilot database, or ‘information structure’, shall be presented. The aim of such an ‘information structure’ is to accept relevant information on pathology and to produce the required output.
T.2.2.c. Report 2 As a deliverable of this phase of WP2, a report will be made, with the findings of the panel discussions and the ‘program of requirements’ for the pilot database.
T.2.3 Setting up a format for the database, validation, and data requirements
Objective
To achieve the goal of information sharing amongst construction actors and Member States, an EU wide database of up to date research, information and eco technologies must be developed, tested and validated over the course of the pilot project. Its primary goal is to create a support mechanism which will allow construction actors and (re)insurers in EU-27 to share new technologies and best practice and to coordinate their activities in a more effective manner. Ultimately, an online system
73 15/09/2011 should be devised which has the capacity to monitor and update construction actors on recent developments in eco technologies and to disseminate the relevant findings on best practice.
Method
First, a format for an information structure will be developed, and validated by the project team. Then, the informatics requirement for the database will be defined, on the basis of which the pilot database (or whatever informatics tool) can be developed in task T.2.4.
Outcome
The results of this phase of the study are presented in a report (T.2.3.d).
Activities
Our activities in this phase will be:
T.2.3.a. Setting up a format for the info the database should provide On the basis of the ‘program of requirements’ for the pilot database as defined in task T.2.2, a format for an ‘information structure’ will be developed.
T.2.3.b. Validation of the format This format will be validated by testing it with the information gathered around the 10 eco- technology studies, mentioned under task T.2.1.
T.2.3.c. Definition of informatics requirements for the database. The informatics requirements will be defined for the database. The tool to be developed should be more considered as a template than as a definitive tool (this means, it needs to be rather flexible to be able to adapt to various sources of information). A choice will be made for the technical solution (Microsoft Access, PHP&mySQL, etc). The connection with the WP1 tool (directive on quality marks) will be illustrated. For coherence and presentation purposes, the two tools developed for WP1 and WP2 will probably be made accessible through the existing ELIOS web site, and so must be internet compatible.
T.2.3.d. Report 3 A report 3 is made, with the findings of this phase (format, informatics requirements).
T.2.4. Develop, test and validate pilot version of database
Objective
The objective of this phase of the study is to make a pilot version of the database, and test and validate this database, and maintain the database during the remainder of the project.
Method
From the result of the previous tasks (especially T.2.3.a,b,c), the data scheme will be designed. In the meantime, the software platform will be tuned according to the interconnection requirements. Although we expect a precise specification from the above task, two versions are planned:
1. A version for test and demo purposes, which should be made available at short notice, in order to collect comments and additional user’s demand. This will be restricted to a small user group, invited to follow-up the database.
74 15/09/2011
2. The final version, ready for use and publication.
The consortium will benefit from several previous experience in general or specific database design and on-line services. A pathology database was recently developed at national level in France, with a focus on low energy consumption building.
Outcome
The outcome of this phase of the study is a validated, tested and updated pilot database, and a report with the findings.
Activities
Our activities in this phase will be:
T.2.4.a. Development of a pilot version of the database A pilot version of the database (or internet tool) will be developed on the basis of the informatics requirements defined in phase T.2.3. It is usually very efficient in professional software developments to demonstrate and clarify functional issues through a prototype. Then, any advices, comments, or unexpected needs can raise- up and be included in the final pilot database. Development will include: the database itself, and two linked interface, one for the on-line consultation and another for the data management. T.2.4.b. Testing and validation of the database The database will be filled with the gathered information on the 10 eco-technology studies, tested and validated. We envisage to do the testing and validation by involvement from the construction sector across the EU. The service will be running on-line and available all throughout EU. Individual contacts from representative bodies will be invited to check the conformity of the service with the specifications. They will assess usability and functional performance. Additional tests will be performed at technical level to ensure the reliability of the database (request, back-up, etc.). Once approved, the database will be made available for all professionals. T.2.4.c. Updating of the database During the remaining time of the pilot project, we will regularly update the data sources and maintenance of the informatics environment. The dedicated interface will be used for the management of the data. It is anticipated that any volunteer from qualified EU bodies can contribute to enrich and improve the content of the database. They will need a login/password to get access to the private administrative area, in order to upload data into the database. The administrative interface will be designed for simple and efficient data type-in. At the maintenance stage, we will perform regular backup of the database, and provide on demand statistics about the content, within the contract period of 3 years.
T.2.4.d. Report 4 At the end of the project, the pilot version of the database and informatics environment will be evaluated and described in a report. Conclusions and recommendations for relevant media support will be given.
75 15/09/2011
Deliverables and milestones Period after start of the = milestone of a deliverable project
State of the art on quality in construction and building pathology From month 0 to month 9 D.2.1.e Report 1 Month 9 Needs and criteria to develop an EU-wide database on quality and From month 9 to month 12 pathology indicators D.2.2.b. Report 2 Month 12 Format, informatics requirements From month 12 to month 15 D.2.3.d. Report 3 Month 15 Developing, testing and validating the pilot database From month 15 to month 20 D.2.4.b. Pilot database operational Month 20 Updating the database From month 20 – 34 D.2.4.c. Updated database Month 35 D.2.4.d. Report 4 (final report) Month 35
Risk management Typical risks for this Work Package are:
- Databases or data sources on building pathology might not be publicly available. In particular insurers who operate such a database will probably not give this information to the project team, because it is confidential. But hopefully they will give insight in the kind of data they possess and collect. For the rest, the researchers can rely on data sources that are publicly available, or data sources of the consortium partners and subcontractors.
- Representatives of (re)insurers or construction parties might not be interested to participate in the panel discussions of task T.2.2. Since this phase of Work Package 2 is crucial for the development of the pilot database, a link to the forums of Work Package 4 will be established. It is expected that the participants of the forums will also contribute to WP2.
In both cases the strong involvement of the stakeholders, especially with the participation of the Forum, would be a factor of success for the pilot project.
Contribution of consortium partners and subcontractors to the tasks of WP2 ARCADIS / PRC Bouwcentrum International will lead this Work Package, will organize panel discussions, gather information on construction quality and building pathology, set up the ‘program of requirement’ for the database, and contribute to the specific tasks. Other participants involved in the Work Package 2 will include: NHBC, CSTB, SBi, BBRI.
76 15/09/2011
WP3
Work package number 3 Start date or starting event Month 1
Activity Type Conditions for a greater convergence of the construction insurance regimes and modalities to cover building sustainability performances
Objectives: The overall aim of WP3 is to analyse the conditions for a greater mutual recognition of the construction insurance regimes and to identify the criteria and modalities for the development of insurance schemes that could support cross border services and the cover of building sustainability performances.
Description of work Background The pilot study ELIOS (European Liability Insurance Organisation Scheme) provided an extensive study of insurance regimes across Europe. The results of the study, that were documented in a main report, pointed to the problem of the extreme diversity of liability and insurance regimes that exist across the 27 EU Member States. The pilot study recommended that a mutual recognition of the various national construction insurance regimes could help promote sustainable development and implementation of innovation in the European construction sector. The overall objective of WP3, therefore, is to analyse the conditions for a greater mutual recognition of the construction insurances regimes and to identify criteria for the development of insurances schemes that could support cross border services and the cover of building sustainability performances.
Detailed objectives The analysis of conditions for a greater mutual recognition of the construction insurances regimes will be conducted in six main tasks, divided in a first group of three parallel studies, carried out in order to support the following three analyses:
Studies: 1. Update of the mapping of insurance regimes in the EU-27
2. Financial mechanisms for sustainability and protection of investor interests
3. Information needs about construction insurance
As those studies are basic input for the further analyses, it will be done at the outset of the Work Package work.
Analyses: 4. State of the art of insurance schemes in the EU-27 and transition paths
77 15/09/2011
5. Analysis of conditions for greater mutual recognition of construction insurances regimes
6. Recommendations for policy formulation stimulating good practices and insurance solutions
These detailed objectives are elaborated below.
1 Update of the mapping of insurance regimes in the EU-27 Based on the information gathered during the ELIOS I pilot project mapping, the assessment will have to:
- Update the information about the current different regimes in force. Beyond strict legal framework, the overview will emphasise insurance solutions that have been set up to assess technological innovation in constructions. Furthermore the overview will specifically outline the construction insurance schemes aimed to small enterprises and “eco technology” in construction and provide concrete recommendation - Survey the existing tax incentives and more generally the regulatory framework regarding incentives for sustainable constructions. - Beyond the certifying organizations (presented under the “schemes and good practices” paragraph in ELIOS I study), the mapping will also present the “quality marks” for which they are responsible. This inventory is made in conjunction with WP1 in order to support the further definition of relevant “risk assessment technical criteria”. - Creation of a synthesis of the different insurance regimes based on a typology of the different types of situations in regard of the further “regime analysis”. For example, classification criteria should be recent regime changes in regard of “eco technologies”. This categorization of the different situations should help reduce the scope of the following analyses on more simplified “standard” regime cases.
2. Financial mechanisms for sustainability and protection of investor interests In parallel with the first objective, this task involves the following processes: - Identification of the different existing financial instruments aimed to the protection of construction works, notably other than insurance. The study will have to take into account the opinion of the largest number of different types of stakeholders involved in the investment protection process as possible. Focus is placed on clarifying the width and depth of mechanisms employed to stimulate sustainable building innovations in the EU. This covers a wide range of public and private steering instruments such as insurance schemes, regulation, subsidy schemes, etc. - Comparison of the assessment of innovation in construction insurance with existing innovation insurance schemes in another field, such as automobile industry. - Outline of the specific hurdles existing in the insurance of construction innovation. - Links with single points of contact (art 21 of the Services Directive 2006/123/EC).
3. Information needs about construction insurance This third study will first have to define the “Innovative Construction Works”, support of the public policies. Thus, in relation with WP1 et 2, creation of:
78 15/09/2011
- A typology of the different “sustainable goals” for construction works: Review of different types of construction works “characteristics” concerned by sustainable development. Examples of categories: life span of the product, carbon cost reduction, energy efficiency - A typology of “Construction Works” related to “eco technologies”: Review of different types of construction works concerned by sustainable development. Examples of categories: photovoltaic, solar panels, cladding insulation, windows, etc.
Based on the knowledge of the technical inspector, the insurer and the reinsurer in construction risk assessment: - Description of the main risk analysis principles in construction insurance, - Identification of the main technical information needs in the construction risk underwriting process for the different Construction Works categories.
Definition of relevant technical criteria:
- In relation to WP1, identification of technical criteria i.e. “quality marks”, needed to assess “eco technology” risks in construction insurance. - For each type of “eco technological” risk, analysis of the pertinence of the technical criteria according to the corresponding risk assessment made by the technical inspector / insurer / reinsurer. - In sum, the study should overview the relevant “quality marks” in regard of risk assessment, for each type of “eco technological construction work”, in respect of “sustainable goals”, recognized by the EU insurance sector at large.
4. State of the art of insurance schemes in the EU-27 and transition paths An overall objective of the project is to achieve concerted change on construction insurance regimes and sustainable innovation in Europe. A transition towards increased levels of sustainable innovation in construction is, however, not only a question of aligning national interests, but also a question of aligning highly discrete and durable systems of construction, energy and insurance within the individual member states. Applying a socio-technical approach, combining contributions from transition theory and institutional theory, the analysis will be conducted as two distinct yet interrelated analyses; a horizontal respectively vertical analysis of regimes development and transformation. The horizontal analysis will focus on the interplay between national and supra-national regulation and on the dynamics of adaption and circulation of insurance schemes in Europe. The vertical analysis, in turn, aim at providing an understanding of the interplay and co- development of national insurance, energy savings and construction procurement strategies within the individual nation context. Thus, the implementation of new insurance schemes necessarily has to take into account the specificities of the existing construction business system as well as the distinct national strategies and plans for energy, climate change and energy efficiency in buildings. The analyses, in sum, will clarify existing transition pathways and burdens toward cross border
79 15/09/2011 services and cover of building sustainability performances.
5. Conditions for greater mutual recognition of construction insurances regimes Numerous national as well as supranational policy initiatives, have addressed development in construction as a systemic challenge. The underlying rationale of such initiatives has been that there is need for concerted action in order to achieve change. As Harty (2005) argued, existing models of innovation in construction often rely on a single, central driving force to introduce innovation and manage them into good currency. Such, unitary measures, however, might not pose the best solution, and may even be counterproductive. Thus even a well-organised and highly elaborated innovation model may not be able to ensure convergence towards a single, legitimate perspective on means and measures necessary to achieve change. Thus, using notably the first two studies, this task will constitute an analysis of the conditions for a greater mutual recognition of construction insurance regimes, and the development of a set of guidelines for a policy formulation. In doing so, insights from governance theory will be applied in a discussion on different approaches to the organisation of new insurance regimes. The analysis will focus specifically on the following issues: - Analysis of the impacts of national strategies toward “sustainable goals” on construction insurance and the interactions with the financial protection mechanisms. - Formulation of general financial protection requirements and regulatory framework influence in order to support the sustainable development. - Conditions for handling incompatibility of national insurance regimes
6. Recommendations for policy formulation stimulating good practices and insurance solutions Based notably on the previous overview of the “information needs of insurance”, we will finally try to see how the pilot project can support insurance and find solutions to overcome the incompatibilities between insurance regimes by the mean of useful information diffusion. Taking into account this contribution, the analysis will provide recommendations for policy formulation about the role, the regulatory framework and the financing of construction insurance within the national strategies for energy and climate change and national plans for energy efficiency in buildings. The recommendations will be developed in close collaboration with a forum composed by representatives from the construction and the (re)insurance sectors, Member Stated and Commission that will be set up in WP4. Method 1. Studies In surveying the experiences with cross border services and the cover of building sustainability performances, interviews with key stakeholders will be the primary source of information. Triangulation of data will take place through consultations with experts. Once the typologies will be clearly defined, a more formatted questionnaire may be send to a wider range of stakeholders in all territories to complete the collection of information.
2. Analyses The analyses will be conducted collegially by the participants of the WP according to a case study
80 15/09/2011 approach, in which a literature review will be combined with a series of qualitative interviews. In the task of mapping the various mechanisms, a literature review of the core construction management journals (encouraged by CIB) and the core risk and insurance management journal will provide the backbone of the study.
Associated risk 1. The risk of absence of relevant risk assessment tools
Risk: Absence of sufficiently relevant technical criteria / quality mark for the (re)insurer to be able to assess the risks due to absence of pathology knowledge due to absence of claim history due to absence of insurance coverage.
Level of risk: high, since the market of construction insurance for “sustainable works” is presumably very scarce considering the novelty of “eco technological construction works”.
Solution: By the means of WP2, enforce a mechanism to collect the pathology information on the selected products. This mechanism should probably be independent from usual insurance data collection paths. A minimum duration for the test period as to be specified to constitute sufficient pathology history for the product in order to support the relevancy of the risk assessment criteria.
2. The risk of stakeholders’ lack of Interest
Risk: Absence of interest, notably by insurers:
- To share their work on those new insurance schemes.
- To see possible new foreign competition on their natural markets.
Level of risk: high, since the process of creation of a new specific insurance policy is difficult and costly :
- Construction insurance law is very specific in regard to other types of insurance,
- Technical risks of innovative construction works are difficult to assess,
- Financial exposure associated to the guarantees is difficult to harness,
- Construction insurance wordings are done by experienced and specialized insurers.
Solution: the technical information that will be provided by the information system associated to the pilot project has to be sufficiently valuable for the insurers in order to help them assess the risks and consequently set up NEW insurance products to seize NEW market opportunities.
Resources Hannover Re – Reinsurer
- Director of construction: Roland Sudres - Senior underwriter: Sabine Bernard - Underwriter: Thomas Dunand
APAVE – Technical Inspection Service
81 15/09/2011
- Energy efficiency specialist: Emmanuel Amy de la Bretèque - Manager technical construction and operation : Claire Doutreluingne
SBi– Research Institute
- Senior Researcher: Kim Haugbølle - Senior Researcher: Stefan Christoffer Gottlieb - CEA – Brokerage and consultancy company
Furthermore, we propose to create a panel of insurers in order to work in close relationship with some of the main actors of the market. It will allow us to know their wishes, concerns and possibilities during the course of the pilot project. Such a panel will play the role of a think tank, leaving each participant a total freedom of opinion. AXA (France), Allianz (Germany) and QBE (UK) have already given their agreement for participating in this panel.
Deliverables Period from the beginning of the project
D3.1: Update of the mapping of insurance regimes in the EU-27 made in ELIOS Month 1-9 pilot project
D3.2: Review of different mechanisms that exist to protect investors’ interests Month 1-12
D3.3: Information needs about construction insurance Month 9-24
D3.4: State of the art of insurance schemes in the EU-27 and transition paths Month 12-24
D3.5: Analysis of conditions for greater mutual recognition of construction Month 21-36 insurance regimes
D3.6: Recommendations for policy formulation Month 24-36
Contribution of consortium partners to the tasks of the WP D3.1: Hannover Re (with the assistance of Allianz network), CEA : Update of the mapping of insurance regimes in the EU-27 D3.2: Apave : Participation to the identification of information needs about construction insurance in order to assess associated risks D3.3: Apave / Hannover Re / WP1 : Selection of relevant technical criteria according to the corresponding risk assessment made by the insurer / reinsurer D3.4: SBi : Analysis of insurance schemes in the EU-27 and transition paths D3.5: CEA and SBi : Analysis of conditions for greater mutual recognition of construction insurance regimes D3.6: Hannover Re : Recommendations for policy formulation
82 15/09/2011
WP4: Communication and dissemination
Work package number WP4
Start date Month 1
Activity Type Policy consultations and dissemination of the results
Objectives: The overall aim of WP4 is to provide policy consultation for the European Commission on the results of the project and to disseminate the results of the project. More specifically, this work package will have following two objectives: 1. To assist the Commission services for the setting up and functioning of a forum composed by representatives from the construction and the (re)insurance sector, Member States and Commission services for the implementation of the results. 2. To disseminate the results of the pilot project to the research community, practitioners and policy makers in the European community.
Description of work Background The pilot study ELIOS (European Liability Insurance Organisation Scheme) provided an extensive study of insurance regimes across Europe. The results of the study were documented in a main report with and an appendix of case studies and three executive summaries in English, French and German. The results are now available at the designated project website (www.elios-ec.eu). The continued and expanded effort by the European Parliament and the European Commission to explore the possibilities of introducing a new European insurance liability scheme on construction requires a more extensive focus on communication and dissemination of the results of this continued effort. In particular, it would be necessary to strengthen the policy consultations with the affected parties among (re)insurers, construction professionals, consumers, member states and policy makers. Further, it would be advisable to ensure a broader dissemination of the results to a much wider audience among for example the rank and file members of trade associations of (re)insurers and construction professionals, the research community and the general public.
Detailed objectives This work package include the following tasks: 1. Define the mandate of the forum, identify members representing various interests from the construction and (re)insurance sectors and from Member States, ensure the secretariat of the forum, e.g. the preparation of invitations and working documents for the meetings, draft minutes, respond to members’ requests, etc.
2. Execute 7 forum meetings in total: 2 meetings of the forum during the first year of the pilot project, 2 meetings during the second year and 3 meetings during the third year. These meetings will take place in
83 15/09/2011 the Commission’s premises. The themes to be discussed at each of the 7 forum meetings will be closely linked to the progress in the other work packages.
3. Prepare 8 newsletters, one following each of the forum meetings and one at the end of the project. The target groups will be the professional practitioners of construction and (re)insurance as well as consumers and policy makers. The newsletters will be available through the website of the previous ELIOS study (www.elios-ec.eu) and be distributed widely through the communication channels of the network behind the study.
4. Prepare 2 news articles and 2 press releases to be disseminated through professional trade journals and media. The target group of the news articles and press releases will be the professional practitioners of construction and (re)insurance. Thus, the news articles will be published in a construction trade journal and an insurance trade journal. The first news article and the first press release will be published in the beginning of the project to attract attention and possible new members to the forum. The second news article and the second press release will be published at the end of the project in order to disseminate the results of the project.
5. Publish the final report of pilot project. The main sections of the final report will be maximum 150 pages long. Minimum three appendices addressing the themes of the three work packages WP1-3 may be added. The final report will be published in electronic form only (except for a rather limited number of paper copies for the commission, partners and others) and made available at the website of
6. Update and revise the website of the previous ELIOS study (www.elios-ec.eu).
Method The approach taken includes two divergent set of methods – a policy and a dissemination strategy: 1) The policy consultations through the forum will be based on dialogue-based interaction with key persons from (re)insurance, construction, consumer organisations etc. along with relevant commission services. The contact and appointment of various commission services will be undertaken by the contracting authority DG ENTR G5. The concrete methods may include knowledge exchange stocks, workshops, small group discussions and priority games. It is important to realise that the forum is not only a site for policy discussions on a new insurance liability scheme but it is also a site for extensive knowledge on the workings of existing insurance schemes, ideas for improvements etc. 2) The dissemination of the results of the project will predominantly take place through designated communication channels to the research community through peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings, practitioners through trade journals and websites, the general public through press releases and policy makers in the European community through liaison by DG ENTR G5. To ensure a direct feedback and interaction between the work packages and the forum, all main partners will be obliged to participate in the forum meetings. The themes of each of the forum meetings will address the core questions and challenges faced by each of the work packages. The timing of themes will be closely linked to the current state of the project. The minutes from each forum meeting will be made available to all of the participants of the project.
84 15/09/2011
The forum meetings will be organised in close collaboration with DG ENTR G5 and the work package leaders. An overall plan for the themes of each forum meetings will be developed as part of the mandate of the forum. Before each of the forum meetings, the work package leaders and DG ENTR G5 will be consulted by email and a video conference meeting may be held to adjust the agenda. Each forum meeting is expected to last 3-4 hours to allow for sufficient absorption and debate among participants. At least the first two forum meetings is expected to apply the method of knowledge exchange stock to ensure that the participants gets deeply acquainted with each other’s core competences and knowledge needs as a precondition for a more informed dialogue on the subject matter. The forum meetings will typically be part of a complete two day meeting package (indicative schedule): - Day 1 at 10-18: Project group meeting for project participants only (day one). The meeting will be open to the contracting authority if DG ENTR G5 wishes to attend. - Day 2 at 9-10: Pre-meeting between WP leaders and DG ENTR G5. - Day 2 at 10-14 (buffet lunch with networking at 13-14): Forum meeting for forum members and project partners. - Day 2 at 14-17: Steering Committee meeting for project partners only (day two). The indicative agenda of each of the forum meetings may look like this: - Welcome by representative of DG ENTR G5. - Progress report on the project by CEA. - Stimulus presentation on the selected theme by one of the work package leaders or an invited speaker. - Debate on the selected theme. - Summing up by CEA and/or DG ENTR G5. The minutes of the forum meetings will be forwarded to DG ENTR G5 no later than 10 days after the meeting. After commentary, the minutes will be circulated to the participants of the forum and other interested parties.
Outcomes The outcome of WP4 will be an improved and validated result of the outcome of the project due to the consultation with policy makers and practitioners, and the peer-review among researchers of the academic solidity of the work undertaken and conclusions drawn.
Resources The tasks of WP4 will be carried out by the main partners only to ensure consistency in the communication and dissemination of the results. The distribution of resources is shown in the table above.
Deliverables D4.1: Establish forum D4.2: Forum meeting 1 D4.3: Forum meeting 2
85 15/09/2011
D4.4: Forum meeting 3 D4.5: Forum meeting 4 D4.6: Forum meeting 5 D4.7: Forum meeting 6 D4.8: Forum meeting 7 D4.9: Newsletter 1 D4.10: Newsletter 2 D4.11: Newsletter 3 D4.12: Newsletter 4 D4.13: Newsletter 5 D4.14: Newsletter 6 D4.15: Newsletter 7 D4.16: Newsletter 8 D4.17: News article 1 D4.18: News article 2 D4.19: Press release 1 D4.20 Press release 2 D4.21: Publish final report D4.22: Update and revise ELIOS website
Milestones and expected result (criteria for assessment) Effectively the milestones of the project will be set by the recurring forum meetings since the forum meetings are the main sites for interaction with practitioners and policy makers. All the other activities of the project will be focused on delivering input to the forum meetings for debate. Consequently, the milestone plan looks like this: Milestone 1: Establishment of forum (Month 1) - Criteria for assessment: A representative coverage of the affected parties in construction, insurance, member states, commission services etc. Milestone 2: Forum meeting 1 (Month 3) - Criteria for assessment: A detailed work plan will be available for discussion. Milestone 3: Forum meeting 2 (Month 7) - Criteria for assessment: A draft version of the directory on quality/conformity marks is available. Milestone 4: Forum meeting 3 (Month 13) - Criteria for assessment: A draft version of the database for indicators of quality and pathology is available. Milestone 5: Forum meeting 4 (Month 19) - Criteria for assessment: A draft version of the analysis of insurance schemes is available.
86 15/09/2011
Milestone 6: Forum meeting 5 (Month 25) - Criteria for assessment: Updated versions of the directory, database and analysis of insurance schemes are available. Milestone 7: Forum meeting 6 (Month 31) - Criteria for assessment: A draft version of the final report is available. Milestone 8: Forum meeting 7 (Month 35) - Criteria for assessment: The final version of the final report is available. Milestone 9: Final report (Month 36) - Criteria for assessment: Delivery of the final report.
Contribution of consortium partners to the tasks of WP4 In general, the communication and dissemination activities will be carried out exclusively by the main partners.
D4.1: Establish forum SBi will take the lead in defining the mandate of the forum and identify members representing various interests from the construction and (re)insurance sectors and from Member States. The other work package leaders will comment on the mandate, forward suggestions for forum meetings and contact potential forum members. The European Commission will approve the mandate of the forum and the list of members.
D4.2-D4.8: Forum meeting 1-7 SBi will be the main responsible partner for running the secretariat of the forum and executing the 7 forum meetings in total and respond to members’ requests. This implies that SBi will prepare the meeting invitations and working documents for the meetings, chair the meetings, and draft the minutes. Further, SBi will define the themes to be discussed at each of the 7 forum meetings in close collaboration with the other work package leaders. All main partners are obliged to participate with at least one representative at each of the forum meetings.
D4.9-D4.16: Newsletter 1-8 NHBC with is large international network and IHHWA assistance will be the most relevant partner to publish the newsletters of the project based on the forum meetings. This will provide interested parties outside the project partners with a natural entrance point. The other main partners will comment on the newsletters, but the time consumption for this will be limited.
D4.17-D4.18: News article 1 and 2 As the project coordinator, CEA will be the most relevant partner to publish the two news articles in trade journals. This will provide interested parties outside the project partners with a natural entrance point. The other main partners will comment on the news articles, but the time consumption for this will be limited.
87 15/09/2011
D4.19-D4.20: Press release 1 and 2 As the project coordinator, CEA will be the most relevant partner to publish the two press releases. This will provide interested parties outside the project partners with a natural entrance point. The other main partners will comment on the press releases, but the time consumption for this will be limited.
D4.21: Publish final report The publication of the final report will be a joint and equal effort by the main partners. Each of the main partners will contribute to the final report, essentially through a chapter on each of the work packages. The chapters may be supplemented with one or more appendices.
D4.22: Update and revise ELIOS website SBi (or CSTB) will initially update the existing ELIOS website. The revised website will be updated at a regular monthly basis by SBi (or CSTB). At least every 6 months the work packages will provide new updated material for the website.
88 15/09/2011
WP5: Project Management
Work package number WP5
Start date Month 1
Activity Type Project Management
Objectives: Ensure coherence between the activities of different Work Packages teams and the associated bodies in order to achieving a timely delivery of defined tasks within the Work Packages
Rationale: The large team of joint contractors and subcontractors involved in the grouping as well as several associated bodies require a substantial coordination and management effort in order to ensure successful performance of the project tasks.
Description of work WP5 is divided in 5 tasks and 6 deliverables.
Task 5.1: General administration of the project including: - Receipt and processing of payments for the members of the grouping - Managing the service administration - Representing the grouping vis à vis the Commission and third parties - Organising working meetings of the research team and associated bodies in CEA’s premises
Task 5.2: Coordination of work between the participants of Work Packages 1,2,3 and 4 - Interface between the Commission and the Work Packages teams, - Ensuring of respect of the work programme and of the project agenda - Ensuring that the Work package teams respect their undertakings in terms of methodology and the research work
Task 5.3: Animation and coordination of activities of the associated bodies: - Forum – the function of this forum will be to ensure guidance of the pilot project and a dialogue between the construction sector, Member States and the Commission to facilitate implementation of the tasks of the Work Programmes 1, 2, 3 and 4. - Scientific Committee - Steering Group - European Professional Stakeholders Representatives
Task 5.4: Ensure an interactive communication with the Commission within the entire duration of the project including in particular: - Defining mandate of the Forum together with Work Package 4 team - Follow up of the Forum activity animated by the Work Package 4 team - ensure that recommendations and feedback of the Commission is adequately taken into
89 15/09/2011
consideration during the entire progress of the project, - attending working meetings with the Commission whenever required in order to collect Commission’s comments and feedback on the progress of the project
Task 5.5: Consolidating of the input of the Work Package teams 1,2,3 and 4 into research reports - Progress report 1 (month 6) - Progress report 2 (month 12) - Progress report 3 (month 18) - Progress report 4 (month 30) - Draft final report (month 35) - Final report (month 36)
Task 5.6. Exchanging with the Commission on the subject of submitted reports, including: - receiving Commission’s observations on the reports, - submitting additional information or updated version of the report if required, - organise issuing of reports approved by the Commission (printing of hard copies, publication of an electronic version via a dedicated website)
Associated risk Involvement of stakeholders There is potential risk that some stakeholders may not wish to become involved in the activities of the Forum. In order to mitigate this risk it is intended to benefit from the consortium network to mobilise the maximum number of relevant organisations. Language issue When available English will be the language used for communication: When only available in local language, it will be necessary to mobilise the network of the partners of the project.
Deliverables: D1 : efficient management and administration of the project (month 0-36) D2: coordination of Work packages to ensure a coherent progress of the research work (month 0-36) D3: Animation and coordination of activities of associated bodies D4: Assistance to the Commission D5: Research reports (months 6, 12, 18, 30, 35, 36) D6: Exchanging with the Commission on the subject of reports submitted and ensure necessary amendments if required
Contribution of consortium partners to the tasks of WP5: NHBC – management and advisory role
90 15/09/2011
91