Defuzzing lifecycle costs

The new ISO standard, which we reveal for the first time this week (see across) will be formally published in April. It offers much-needed clarity and definition on the matter.

There is clearly an urgent need for the sector as a whole, and especially clients, to grasp the nettle on this issue. Without an understanding of the real total cost of buildings, from site purchase through to maintenance, energy use and future changes of use, we are all lost in a fuzz of confusion. This is most starkly felt in the PFI/PPP arena, which has lifetime costs at its heart.

Perhaps the standard will be able to form the basis of a proper comparison between similar buildings types, such as those built on the back of New Labour's devolution of political power to Wales and Scotland. The basic cost per square metre comparison is inexact, over simplistic and only tells half the story (see news and feature).

The standard can hopefully also go some way to providing desperately needed information on the sustainable lifespan of buildings, which architect David Cafferty points out is currently unclear and as yet untested.

Who do you think you are?

Do most of you still term yourselves quantity surveyors? Despite many other names or phrases being bandied around the sector from practitioners, half of you still do, according to a poll we have been running on our website in recent weeks. The other half polled plump for project management, which is clearly a different role, as well cost managers and construction consultants. A sole 1% of readers plump for value advisor. So while whizzy and flashy new titles abound for the profession it seems most of you are still happy with the QS tag.