# A Case Study on Integrating an Eco-Design Tool into the Construction Decision-Making Process
## 2 Methodology  
### UAveiroGreenBuilding Eco-Design Tool  
#### 2.1.1 Database Structure  
[PERSON] et al. [26] developed a decision-support tool based on eco-design concepts to evaluate the environmental and economic performance of competitive building materials and construction solutions. The eco-design tool relies on mandatory information available in EPDs to ensure a good level of harmonization and data comparability. In addition, the exclusive selection of product-specific EPDs aimed to further limit the effects of uncertainties in the outputs. Future improvements to the eco-design tool may include uncertainty characterization, sensitivity analysis, and iterative refinements, which are, however, beyond the scope of this work. The database built includes environmental impacts,resource consumption, and potential end-of-life scenarios, determined according to EN 15804:2013 [21] and EN 15942:2021 [34].  
Project-detailing information should be included in the new version of the tool, comprising:  
* Code: an alphanumeric token (e.g., A11) should be created to identify each EPD. This token is essential for automating data transfer processes and communication with BIM.
* Case: information should be provided to identify the case study under analysis (e.g., window frame solutions).
* Material/solution: identification of the building material/construction solution (e.g., PVC window frame). Environmental data collected from EPDs comprise fourteen indicators.
* Classification: materials should be classified as either new or repurposed/recycled.
* Program: the registration system where the EPD is deposited should be referenced (e.g., INIES).
* Registration code: the EPD and ECO Platform codes should be included for ease of traceability.
* Standard: the EN norm used to quantity environmental impacts should be disclosed. This information is of utmost importance, as environmental indicators determined as prescribed by EN 15804:2012+A1:2013 [21] and EN 15804:2012+A2:2019 [35] may not be comparable.
* Publication and expiration date: such information should be included to guarantee up-to-date data. A maximum timeframe of 2 years is recommended for accurate results. This information also provides a time reference for long-term data storage and future analysis.
* Manufacture and location: relevant information for traceability and determination of the environmental impact associated with transport operations. Herein, the manufacturers' details will be omitted, and commercial information will not be disclosed.
* Functional unit: a functional unit should be indicated and used to conduct unbiased comparisons of competitive materials and building solutions.
* System boundaries: systems boundaries should be disclosed, and equivalent boundaries should be considered when comparing competitive solutions. For example, a construction solution in which a significant number of environmental indicators are available should not be compared with an equivalent technical solution with only few indicators available (which, therefore, would risk compromising subsequent analysis of the results).
* Recycled material: the inclusion of recycled materials should be declared, and recycled materials should be identified.