Search results

The research on sustainable campus is related to environmental protection and the realization of global sustainable development goals (SDGs). Because the sustainable campus development in China and Japan is carried out around buildings, this paper takes Kitakyushu Science and Research Park as a case to study the characteristics and typical model of sustainable campus in Japan by combined with the characteristics of Chinese sustainable campus.

This study compares the evaluation standards of green buildings between China and Japan, then compares the assessment results of the same typical green building case and finally summarizes the development mode and main realization path by discussing the implications of green buildings on campus sustainability.

The results show that (1) the sustainable campus evaluation in Japan mainly pays attention to the indoor environment, energy utilization and environmental problems. (2) Buildings mainly affect the sustainability of the campus in three aspects: construction, transportation and local. (3) The sustainable campus development model of Science and Research Park can be summarized as follows: taking green building as the core; SDGs as the goals; education as the guarantee; and the integration of industry, education and research as the characteristics.

It mainly provides construction experience for other campuses around the world to coordinate the contradictions between campus buildings and the environment based on sustainable principles in their own construction. It proposes a new sustainable campus construction path of “building–region–environment” integrated development.

This study provides theoretical framework for the development of sustainable campuses that includes long-term construction ideas and current technological support greatly improving the operability of practical applications. It not only enriches the sample cases of global sustainable campuses but also provides new ideas and perspectives for the sustainable development research of the overall campus through quantitative evaluation of building and environmental impacts.

The assessment of building performance in terms of environmental impact and overall sustainability approach is carried out by several methods, different in terms of structure, application and parameters involved. A review of the most frequently used tools available at the moment is presented and a comparison of the tools in terms of general characteristics and environmental parameters is undertaken. Moreover, suggestions are made with regards to a future, easy to use, sustainable building Mediterranean assessment tool.

The methods are investigated in terms general parameters such as their applicability and also in terms of their primary environmental issues of concern involved. A comparative analysis is undertaken.

The investigation showed that none of the methods seem to incorporate all the parameters involved. Especially, the economic and social factors as well as comfort, which are all significant parameters directly involved to sustainability, are assessed only by half of the tools presented. The focus of the methods seems to be on issues regarding energy, landscape‐site, resources and quality of indoor environment.

The paper encourages the development of a more complete tool, which will include as many parameters as possible and would be applicable at a macro‐regional scale (e.g. the Mediterranean region).

The paper can be used as the starting point for future research as well as a reference paper.

The damage humans caused to the environment post the industrial revolution fostered developing sustainability-rating systems – a number of evaluation instruments that focus on various factors to evaluate buildings and small-scale urban developments. Nevertheless, no buildings are certified in Bahrain, the environmentally challenged country in the Arabian Gulf. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This study assesses 11 sustainability-rating systems: LEED, Green Globes, BREEAM, DGNB, SBTool, WELL, CASBEE, Green Star, HQE, GSAS and the Pearl Rating System (PRS). These were selected because of their international applicability, popularity and importance. The study adopts a system of criteria using a comparative review and cross-comparisons to draw conclusions on the compliance of the selected systems to the Bahraini context and assesses the need and importance of a customised sustainability-rating tool.

The study concluded that LEED is the most comprehensive, international and versatile sustainability-rating system. It is also the most popular. Nevertheless, the PRS is the most relevant to the Bahraini context and is the easiest to access.

This paper provides a deep understanding of sustainability-rating tools and introduces a methodology of comparison that can be used as a reference when choosing between tools.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the characteristics of green building guidelines in developed countries and to analyze their influence on the evolution and adoption of similar guidelines in India.

This research reviews the green building guidelines in the developed as well as the developing countries such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design guidelines for new construction (LEED^® NC‐USA), Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM)‐UK, Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Efficiency (CASBEE)‐Japan, and LEED^®‐India and further performs a comparative analysis of these guidelines.

Based on the comparative analysis of LEED^® NC‐USA, BREEAM‐UK, and CASBEE‐Japan, the characteristics that might have affected their current acceptance were identified. The catalysts and hindrances associated with the acceptance of LEED‐India in India were identified based on the comparative analysis of LEED^® NC‐USA and LEED^®‐India.

With an exponential growth of construction industry in the rapidly developing countries, there is a definite need to promote the adoption of green building guidelines. The methodology adopted in this research can be applied to understand the evolution as well as future adoption of green building guidelines in other countries that are facing similar circumstances.

Buildings/infrastructure are recognised to have a significant impact on the environment and the community, and hence there is pressure on industry practitioners to incorporate environmental and social considerations in addition to the traditional cost, time and quality. The development of sustainability reporting tools (SRTs) to assist in the management of “green” building/infrastructure projects is pivotal in informing on progress in sustainability practices. However, the rapid growth of SRTs in the last decade, with different criteria and methodology, has created complications for stakeholders.

The paper provides a comprehensive review of tools to guide practitioners, property investors, policy makers and developers towards making informed choices in “green” building/infrastructure projects. Comparative analyses, benefits and limitations of these tools are discussed in the paper.

Some of the findings from the analysis of SRTs include: an emphasis on environmental issues; scoring which does not account for uncertainty or variability in assessors’ perceptions; lack of published reasoning behind the allocation of scores; inadequate definition of scales to permit differentiation among projects; and the existence of non-scientific benchmarks.

The paper departs from earlier reviews to include a discussion on infrastructure SRTs, life cycle tools, and issues broader than the environment. Changes and additions, subsequent to earlier reviews, have been made to SRTs, making the updated review provided here useful.

This study aims to explore the challenges associated with the integration of resilience and sustainability, and propose a workable solution that ensures resilient and sustainable buildings. Recent research outcomes suggest that the number of natural hazards, both environmental and geophysical, will increase due to the effect of global warming. Various approaches have been investigated to reduce environmental degradation and to improve the physical resilience to natural hazards. However, most of these approaches are fragmented and when combined with cultural barriers, they often result into less-efficient assessment tools.

The primary source of information used to develop this paper has been research publications, policy papers, reports and tool guidelines. A set of questions were developed to guide the review which was complemented with information distilled from the HFA 2005-2015 to develop an integration process to evaluate 10 international sustainability appraisal tools.

The major finding of this research is that, from a technical point of view, resilience and sustainability could be integrated. However, it requires a long and thorough process with a multidisciplinary stakeholder team including technical, strategic, social and political parties. A combination of incentives and policies would support this process and help people work towards the integration. The Japanese model demonstrates a successful case in engaging stakeholders in the process which led to the development of a comprehensive appraisal tool, CASBEE®, where resilience and sustainability are integrated.

Although data have been sought through literature review (i.e. secondary data), the research is expected to have significant impact, as it provides a clear theoretical foundation and methods for those wishing to integrate resilience within current sustainability appraisal tools or develop new tools.

This paper provides original concepts that are required to reduce fragmentation in the way resilience and sustainability are addressed. It sets up a new research agenda which has the potential to have a strong impact due the fact that sustainability and resilience are getting higher on the political priority scale.

This paper provides findings of an original idea to reduce fragmentation in the way resilience and sustainability are addressed. It sets up a new research agenda which has the potential to have a strong impact due the fact that sustainability and resilience are getting higher on the political priority scale.

Developing countries are currently on the verge of adopting principles used in achieving a sustainable urban future. As the urban population increases due to factors like urban–rural migration, increase in birth rate, migration, industrialisation, commercialisation, amongst others, there is a drastic need to adopt sustainability principles within urban spaces. To understand how sustainability can be achieved, there is a need to recognise how developed countries have designed assessment tools that work within their context which can inform how developing countries can work on their assessment tool. Urban neighbourhood sustainability assessment tools are used to reflect on the overall goal of the project and the most important indicators needed to be implemented within the project. Sustainability indicators are used to measure the levels and progress at which sustainability has been implemented within a project based on the data collected and these results can be used to make informed decisions. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the development of urban sustainability assessment tool.

This research investigates the techniques utilised in developing an urban sustainability assessment tool Sustainable Composite Cities Environmental Evaluation and Design (SUCCEED-ND) tool within the Nigerian context. The data instrument used includes a questionnaire survey that sampled 50 correspondents, and the results were used to develop an urban assessment tool tailored for the Nigerian countries.

The findings used social, environmental, economic and planning sustainability dimensions in the design of the assessment tool which composes of 21 core sustainability indicators and 105 indicators to develop SUCCEED-ND tool.

This work developed the first urban sustainability assessment tool for the Nigerian urban environment. The result is meant to evaluate and implement sustainability within existing and proposed neighbourhood development.

This research aims to analyze the evolution of sustainable building rating tools in the United States of America over approximately 30 years. It analyzes the shift from addressing purely environmental concerns to embracing a holistic approach that includes economic and social considerations.

By conducting a comprehensive literature review and analysis, this research systematically examines the differences among sustainable building rating tools (SBRTs). It establishes a decision-making support framework for stakeholders based on existing literature, standards and emerging trends.

Expected findings include insights into the evolution and distinctions among SBRTs. The research is expected to reveal the progression of SBRTs from purely focusing on environmental dimensions to exploring a broader scope that includes economic and social dimensions. The decision-making support framework and forward-looking perspective aim to guide stakeholders in tool selection and offer insights for future developments.

The focus of this research primarily centers on SBRTs, which originated in the United States of America, thereby excluding famous global tools such as BREEAM and CASBEE. Therefore, the research outcomes are particularly appropriate to the context of the United States of America. In addition, specific indicators within the general indicators system are not entirely independent of each other, leading to interrelationships between different indicators during the evaluation process. Moreover, in terms of data availability, the early versions of various SBRTs suffered from information gaps, potentially introducing ambiguity in the description of specific indicators, which could influence the weighting results.

This research contributes original perspectives by offering a nuanced understanding of the dynamic nature of sustainable building practices. The decision-making support framework adds practical value, assisting stakeholders in selecting diverse certification options. It also contributes to the original body of knowledge by providing insights for future developments in sustainable building practices and certifications.