###### Abstract
Therefore, it is essential to assess risks and rewards associated with these variables through scenario analysis and the application of non-deterministic methods such as sensitivity analysis or the Monte Carlo Method. Stochastic methods and sensitivity analysis are underutilized in practice due to perceived complexity and lack of expertise, showing shortcomings in the development of tools. On the other hand, the main limitation of deterministic models lies in their reliance on exact data. Considering that building processes can often be assimilated to VUCA (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, Ambiguity) environments [27], at best, it is possible to generate value ranges based on hypotheses supported by the experience, information, and knowledge of qualified professionals [28]. This fact has led to further methodological standardization gaps and data quality inconsistencies. Although there is an inherent risk of error in the measurement or determination of life-cycle cost (LCC), this does not diminish its value as a tool for assessing sustainability and supporting decision-making, both within the developer's field of action and among regulatory authorities aiming to establish future standards and improve public incentive distribution. In fact, [PERSON] [29] asserts that the incorporation of intangible assets enables companies to enhance profitability without necessarily requiring a proportional increase in investment. If this profitability growth is interpreted as a long-term cost reduction, it follows that the exclusion of intangible factors from LCC assessments compromises the integrity and effectiveness of the resulting decisions. Externalities, the direct and indirect effects that an activity has on other activities, connect in this context with the concept of intangibles, and at the same time, with the elementary costs stated previously. Intangible costs could be defined as all the costs and revenues that can be foreseen and assumed but do not occur until a new practice or policy is implemented. Similarly, intangible impacts can be seen as direct economic impacts on the customer's organization in terms of asset management, which, in some cases, could result in improvements for users' well-being, bringing further economic implications. According to the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) [30], intangible assets are identifiable, non-monetary assets without physical substance that are expected to provide probable future economic benefits to an entity. Such is the case of concepts linked to functionality, flexibility, or even aesthetics, which can influence the evaluation and play a major role in the investment profit puzzle [29]. A significant example is the social factors that influence the redistribution of the population in the territory, with important economic consequences in the medium and long term for the different regions and their local businesses. The measurement of intangibles presents several challenges, primarily due to their immaterial nature, and it has traditionally been recognized in the literature as inherently difficult to quantify. Intangibles are often conceptualized as future income streams that may be inseparable from tangible assets, represent the right to obtain certain benefits, and as such, must be classified as capital [30]. Considering that life-cycle cost (LCC) assessments entail not only economic but also environmental, social, political, legislative, and regulatory implications, the role of all stakeholders involved--building agents, owners, and users, among others--is crucial in promoting the sustainability of projects. Consequently, intangible values arising from diverse sources can be systematically studied and quantified. Although its theoretical value has been widely acknowledged, LCC remains underutilized in both design and asset management practice due to a range of practical limitations, as stated previously.