Search results

Through an empirical study, this research proposes a multi-dimensional assessment method for Sustainable Building Design (SBD). This approach is adopted to investigate and evaluate the current practices of SBD and to provide a basis for refining such processes while reducing existing shortfalls. In doing so, a holistic sustainable framework for rating the sustainable performance of buildings is proposed.

To achieve the aforementioned purpose, this research (1) investigates the most current trends in SBD including the use of Building Information Modelling (BIM); (2) examines the practical issues of SBD; (3) proposes a multi-dimensional assessment method; and (4) compares 18 separate case studies in the three countries of Australia, United Kingdom and USA, as part of the SBD implementation. To compare these case studies, an additional SBD tool, Green Building Rating and Certification System (GBELS) was carefully selected and applied. Five core values of SBD were identified based on functionality, accessibility and productivity, which align with the GBELS outcomes.

This research found that, for the 18 examined buildings, the main issues in SBD in the three countries concerned environmental and ecological issues. These included the impacts of buildings on the environment, as well as issues concerning the buildings' life cycle analysis and assessment. It was also determined that energy usage, pollution reduction and climate change concerns were important inclusions in establishing these buildings, particularly in the USA.

To support the research aim, this paper explores the most innovative trends in SBD assessments including their Structural Health Monitoring (SHM), grade (stars) classification, Relative Weight (RW) and particularly GBELS. GBELS was selected for this research, since it is relatively new and there is little available literature discussing its adaptation. Accordingly, this research further evaluates the application of GBELS as a part of versatility in SBD multi-dimensional assessment method. As the basis of these tests, a total of 18 separate case studies are closely evaluated.