Discover the partnership websiteLiving Atlas of Quality
Publication:4 August 2026
| Location | Canada|Quebec|Laval |
| Typologies | Architecture of sports and leisure|Nautical facilities and swimming pools |
| Canadian Competitions Catalogue | https://www.ccc.umontreal.ca/fiche_concours.php?lang=en&cId=427 |
Rapport des activités liées au concept « Composite » Qualité_ULaval_#8A thorough understanding of the composite concept of quality requires a standardized and well-defined framework (Ala'a, 2016). The term “quality” is often poorly defined and difficult to measure, which leads to confusion and differing interpretations (David et al., 2014). To understand and quantify this concept, it is important to take into account the complexity and multidimensional nature of quality (Catalin et al., 2023). Furthermore, a better understanding of quality can be achieved by disaggregating an organization’s composite results and identifying appropriate definitions of quality for each component (George, 1981). By doing so, the richness and complexity of quality can be captured more comprehensively (Carol et al., 1995). Quality in the built environment is a complex and subjective concept that is difficult to define precisely. It is influenced by various factors such as values, perceptions, and interpretations, leading to disagreements and debates among professionals and individuals (Benjamin et al., 2016). The concept of quality carries value and can be understood differently over time and among different people (Magnus et al., 2010). There are several ways to interpret and evaluate environmental quality, which results in a variety of research frameworks and approaches (Sung-Hoon and Yoon, 2013). Quality in architecture and urban design is a property that can be characterized and contrasted by analyzing the presence of specific qualities in buildings (Mohammad et al., 2013). The concept of quality reflects the holistic approach of the architectural profession and is of public interest (Magnus et al., 2007). However, further research is needed on quality of life in the built environment, particularly in disciplines such as architecture and landscape architecture. Understanding and embracing the multifaceted concept of quality in the built environment requires taking into account its various perspectives, interpretations, and evaluations. Report prepared by Professor Michel De Blois (Ph.D.), Alex Langevin, Aya Boussouf, Dener François, Léa Lidam, Roxane Fontus, and Siba Américain Bilivogui.
Approche multicritères combinant SIG et AHP pour intégrer la qualité dans la stratégie d'aménagement du territoire urbain_ULaval_#9Land use planning has long relied on tools inherited from an economic logic of production — zoning plans that separate functions and optimise efficiency — that are poorly equipped to account for the quality of the living environments they produce. Planning discourse increasingly expresses an intention to pursue quality, yet quality’s multiple facets make that intention difficult to operationalise: it rests jointly on the physical characteristics of a place and on the sensory, individual experience people have of it. This article proposes a Geographic Information System (GIS)–Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) approach capable of addressing this complexity for Built Environment Quality (BEQ). We translate BEQ into two complementary sets of spatial indicators — traditional physical and locational metrics, and enhanced human-centric criteria capturing aesthetic quality, public-space quality, noise exposure, and social diversity — and employ the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to weight them against explicit, stakeholder-defined policy objectives. The resulting BEQ suitability index is demonstrated through a case application to the Communauté métropolitaine de Québec (CMQ), leveraging its public-policy framework and open geospatial data, and is rendered as an actual thematic map that we read and discuss rather than merely anticipate. We situate the approach’s academic, socio-economic, and political relevance, while being explicit about its limits: the model quantifies what can be measured, but must be integrated with a complementary qualitative, contextual reading that accounts for what cannot. We close with a four-phase implementation roadmap that gives municipal authorities a practical path from adoption to routine use. By Aya Boussouf, Dener Francois, Léa Lidam, Michel De Blois, Roxane Fontus and Siba Américain Bilivogui.
Déconstruction des points de vue des parties prenantes_ULaval_#10ABSTRACT: Quality in the built environment is widely sought yet notoriously difficult to define, measure, and act upon. This article argues that quality is not an intrinsic, measurable property of built objects but a social, dynamic, and multidimensional construct that is negotiated among actors holding divergent value systems. Building on a cross-analysis of contemporary academic definitions and an actor-centred co-design process, we propose a conceptual framework that situates quality along objective/subjective and individual/collective axes, and we apply it to deconstruct Québec’s eleven guiding principles for quality in the built environment. Through the notion of a “composite principle,” we show how each principle is selectively mobilised, hierarchised, and redefined by different stakeholders, exposing governance tensions that recur across the project life cycle. Grounded in Actor-Network Theory and a mixed qualitative–quantitative (“QualQuan”) methodology combining participant observation, co-creation workshops, semantic analysis, and geospatial data, the study yields two main contributions: (1) a case for more collaborative, reflexive, and participatory planning processes supported by systematic lifecycle management of quality-related data; and (2) a practical toolkit — a Quebec-specific quality dictionary and a six-stage roadmap — for negotiating quality that is optimised by user experience. We conclude that advancing quality in the built environment requires reflexive, participatory planning capable of making explicit, and arbitrating, the plural constructions of quality at stake, with direct implications for urban design theory and practice. Report prepared by Professor Michel De Blois (Ph.D.), Alex Langevin, Anjara Mamisoa, Aya Boussouf, Dener François, Léa Lidam, Roxane Fontus, and Siba Américain Bilivogui. Keywords: Built Environment Quality; Composite Concept; Stakeholder Perspectives; Governance; Planning Theory; Actor-Network Theory (ANT); Iron Triangle; Geospatial Data; Actor Perceptions
