Setting a priority benchmark for building maintenance in Taiwan's National Universities

被引:0
|
作者
Chang, Chih-Yuan [1 ]
Huang, Shyh-Meng
Guo, Sy-Jye [2 ]
机构
[1] Feng Chia Univ, Dept Civil Engn, Taichung 40724, Taiwan
[2] Publ Construct Commiss, Complaint Review Board Govt Procurement, Taipei, Taiwan
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Managers of government-owned buildings, specifically in Taiwan, commonly face an urgent and difficult problem: how to create a building maintenance priority benchmark and, by doing so, distribute maintenance resources in the most beneficial way. This research investigated all 60 national universities in Taiwan. Through the use of expert interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, and AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), this study analyzed 14 evaluation criteria (related to a building attributes and components on a daily and annual basis) influencing the creation of a building maintenance priority benchmark: (1) use necessity; (2) maintenance urgency; (3) impact on individuals; (4) impact on public; (5) current age relative to age/design limit; (6) exterior condition; (7) deterioration of components; (8) functional impairment of main structure; (9) functional impairment of walls and finish; (10) functional impairment Of electrical, air conditioning, communication, and monitoring/control; (11) functional impairment of plumbing, sanitation facilities, and fire protection; (12) value improvement rate; (13) maintenance management efficiency; and (14) use efficiency. The result of this research is the formulation Of a "Maintenance Priority Benchmark (MPB) for School Buildings in Taiwan National Universities," which can provide government-building managers a valuable reference for maintenance decision making.
引用
收藏
页码:162 / 175
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia research priority setting exercise
    Howell, S. J.
    Pandit, J. J.
    Rowbotham, D. J.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2012, 108 (01) : 42 - 52
  • [22] Multi-phase healthcare professions education research priority setting in Taiwan
    Gugel, Arthur
    Babovic, Mojca
    Monrouxe, Lynn
    MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2019, 53 (11) : 1159 - 1160
  • [23] National Health Insurance in South Africa: Relevance of a national priority-setting agency
    Hofman, Karen J.
    McGee, Shelley
    Chalkidou, Kalipso
    Tantivess, Sripen
    Culyer, Anthony J.
    SAMJ SOUTH AFRICAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2015, 105 (09): : 739 - 740
  • [24] Comprehensive maintenance dataset of building facilities for planned preventive and unplanned maintenance in North American universities
    Pampana, Ashish Kumar
    Jeon, JungHo
    Yoon, Soojin
    Weidner, Theodore J.
    DATA IN BRIEF, 2024, 57
  • [25] Archives as a priority in the public policies of a true democracy. Responsibility of national universities
    Belinche, Marcelo
    Mariana Casareto, Laura
    Vinas, Rossana
    Jaureguiberry, Laura
    QUESTION, 2013, 1 (40): : 217 - 231
  • [26] A review of selected research priority setting processes at national level in low and middle income countries: towards fair and legitimate priority setting
    Tomlinson, Mark
    Chopra, Micky
    Hoosain, Naeema
    Rudan, Igor
    HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2011, 9
  • [27] A review of selected research priority setting processes at national level in low and middle income countries: towards fair and legitimate priority setting
    Mark Tomlinson
    Micky Chopra
    Naeema Hoosain
    Igor Rudan
    Health Research Policy and Systems, 9
  • [28] The Norwegian National Council for Priority Setting in Health Care: decisions and justifications
    Wester, Gry
    Bringedal, Berit
    HEALTH ECONOMICS POLICY AND LAW, 2018, 13 (02) : 118 - 136
  • [29] INEQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF HEALTH RESOURCES IN BRAZIL: AN ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL PRIORITY SETTING
    Ferri-de-Barros, Fabio
    Howard, Andrew W.
    Martin, Douglas K.
    ACTA BIOETHICA, 2009, 15 (02): : 179 - 183
  • [30] Facing an Aging Society: Taiwan's Universities in crisis
    Hu Hsiao-Mei
    GERONTOLOGY & GERIATRICS EDUCATION, 2020, 41 (02) : 233 - 241