Decision Criteria for Retrofitting Existing Campus with Green Roof

Abstract

The Greenery system on buildings is an interesting approach to address the urban, and environmental issues yet provide economic and social benefits. The educational campus in Higher Learning Institution (HLI) has been regarded as a small city that can implement the greenery system area. Green roofs have rapidly become a key in sustainable building development and design features for urban cities and have started being applied in a campus building. However, the built environment in the campus is mostly covered with the existing buildings. Several studies also conducted green roof aspects but with a vast focus on the new building design. Thus, there is an urgent need to identify retrofitting criteria on green roof implementation for existing buildings to achieve optimal solutions. This chapter aims to identify the influential criteria for implementing green roof initiatives in the educational building of HLI. A list of 12 green roof criteria has been identified based on design and economics. A questionnaire has been designed and distributed to architects as important stakeholders in green roof development. The results obtained were analysed with factor analysis based on principal component analysis with Varimax Rotation and Factor Score to categorise and rank according to the importance of criteria. The outcomes of this study showed that design criteria should concern waterproofing, drainage, and access; economic criteria are construction costs, return on investment, and maintenance cost. This study enables decision-makers to consider the criteria established during the decision of retrofitting an existing building with a green roof.

Citation

Abidin, N.I.B., Zakaria, R. and Shamsuddin, S.M. (2022), "Decision Criteria for Retrofitting Existing Campus with Green Roof", Din, M.F.M., Alias, N.E., Hussein, N. and Zaidi, N.S. (Ed.) Sustainability Management Strategies and Impact in Developing Countries (Community, Environment and Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 26), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2040-726220220000026003