Search results

The proliferation of environmental rating tools over the past two decades has endeavoured to assist the industry in measuring sustainability. Recent changes to the International Valuation Standards (IVS) have directed valuers to consider ESG. The purpose of this study aims to examine how commonly utilized sustainability tools, which have been employed to communicate building sustainability credentials, align with the IVS categories of ESG.

The research utilises the IVS categorisation of ESG and maps sustainability tools adopted at scale by the Australian Commercial Real Estate market. The approach identifies the various attributes within the commonly utilised rating tools that align with IVS defined ESG criteria.

The mapping provides insights into the coverage of the IVS ESG criteria in the mainstream tools used in Australia. Further, the research identifies existing sustainability criteria that are relevant to the built environment, that have not been clearly identified by the IVS, but have an important role in evaluating the sustainability of commercial real estate.

For investors, occupiers and valuers, this research provides insights on how the current, commonly utilised sustainability rating tools align with the IVS-defined ESG metrics. This research assists in providing greater clarity regarding the relationship between ESG criteria and existing rating tools, which have been recently identified as key considerations in valuation practice and help to provide transparency and understanding for property stakeholders.

The importance of monitoring, reporting and enhancing transparency in ESG disclosures has emerged as a central issue with significant implications for the property industry. This research provides the first evaluation of how existing sustainability rating tools map against ESG criteria as directed in the IVS.

The present study aims to inform the requirements for developing a sustainable rating tool for small-scale infrastructure projects (SSIPs) through research findings.

A review-based comparative study of existing infrastructure sustainability (IS) rating tools for assessment of SSIPs is presented. Key stakeholder participants of the existing IS rating tools, are interviewed to identify existing barriers and requirements for sustainability rating. The study further presents possible rating tool options to optimise the sustainable performance evaluation of SSIPs.

Findings of this study indicated that prevalent IS rating tools are majorly applied to large-scale infrastructure projects and sustainability of SSIPs are seldom assessed. Based on a literature review and series of interviews, it was found that user friendliness, efficient structure, training and technical support, cost effectiveness and stakeholder recognition are the five key requirements of a sustainability rating tool for SSIPs. Additionally, six sustainability assessment options were proposed for SSIPs which range from pathways for existing tools through to new, customisable tools. Upon comparison, a new modified tool with verification process and revised tool with defined grouping of sustainable criteria was more effective for evaluation of SSIPs.

Use of case specific information for validation and framework development may lack generalisation. However, methodology can be used for future decision-making by making necessary adjustments to suit different local regional requirements.

Despite lack of generalisation, the findings can lead to future general studies on sustainability of SSIPs. Findings of the study provide foundation knowledge and awareness for sustainability evaluation of SSIPs.

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 research investigates valuers' understanding of the value of sustainability in property and its' consideration in valuation practice in Australia. This paper explores valuers' perceptions of the relationships between sustainability and market values, sustainability and valuation variables, and the value influence of industry sustainability certification schemes. Further, this paper tracks prevalence of certified buildings in Australian commercial markets and the evolution of valuers' knowledge of sustainability certifications used in Australia.

This paper reports on the next rendition of a longitudinal study examining valuers’ practice in Australia. This research explores the evolution of Australian valuers' perception and knowledge of sustainability in valuation practice. The survey data has been periodically collected from practising valuers from 2007 to 2021. The survey questions investigate valuers' knowledge development, understanding, reporting and consideration of the relationship between sustainability and market value.

The results have identified the evolution of the influence of normative research on valuers' perceptions of the relationship between sustainability and value; with a clearer understanding emerging over time of where the value relationships are identified in valuation variables. Greater alignment between empirical Australian studies and valuers' perceptions of the influence of sustainability ratings on value, demonstrate the value connection for higher rated buildings under NABERS (energy rating) and Green Star. Whilst only 41% of the study's participants are including sustainability in their valuation reports, they include a higher level of commentary on building descriptions and initiatives, building ratings, and reporting of owner and tenant objectives, than in previous studies. Knowledge development relating to sustainability certification tool, NABERS was identified. This is likely linked to the introduction of mandatory disclosure legislation. This has also led to increased awareness and valuers' knowledge of the differences between the two key rating tools used in Australia.

The research has several limitations: firstly, recruitment of valuers and the number of valuers' responses has varied over time; secondly, due to collection methods respondents have a greater likelihood of having an interest in and knowledge of sustainability creating potential for positive bias; thirdly, respondents may have responded to the survey in different years, but due to anonymity there has been no ability to track this. The results provide insights into the Australian valuation profession but may not be fully representative of the profession overall in Australia.

The broader agenda of net zero, climate change, mitigation and carbon requirements, whether driven by market forces or government legislation, are generating changes in property markets as investors' reconsider their positions and model the implications of carbon emissions on their bottom lines. Introductions of policy and legislation over time in the Australian context have led to changes in valuation practice and increasing consideration of energy efficiency and ratings in the valuation of assets. However, further guidance and research still is required in Australia to assist in the knowledge development of valuers, and their ability to consider the emerging effects of sustainability, net zero and other market driven objectives including legislation, and how these may affect or influence their evaluation of market evidence and thus property values.

The research has tracked valuers' understanding, knowledge, and consideration of sustainability and energy efficiency in valuation practice since 2007. In that time the research has found that, as the market has evolved and more rated buildings are built (or retrofitted), so too has valuers' knowledge and consideration in valuation practices evolved. Valuers are more engaged with industry rating tools such as NABERS. This suggests that the Australian mandatory disclosure policies have contributed to changes in the market, which are then interpreted by valuers and reflected in their perceptions and consideration of energy ratings in valuation practice.

Rating tools for the built environment were designed to engage consumers and enhance sustainability and resilience. However, the intended outcomes of these rating systems appear to have limited implementation in the residential new housing market in Australia. The purpose of this paper is to investigate consumers’ motivations and experiences who have purchased houses that are situated in a sustainability-based certified development and will have been required to comply with mandatory dwelling certification.

The paper explores the awareness and perception of sustainability ratings and whether the motivations for purchasing in the sustainably certified development have heightened their awareness of sustainability and the resilience of new housing. This has been investigated through a pilot study of consumers who have purchased land in a certified estate and built a new home, through an online survey.

The findings reveal that the rating systems are at present not having the desired influence as first thought; that is, to inform consumers of the sustainability of a dwelling or property and to instigate trust of the environmental credentials of the property.

This illuminating case study of participants who have purchased a sustainable rated development demonstrates that regardless of their concern for environmental issues, consumers have both low awareness and trust in the ratings. Despite this, consumers do seek value from these credentials to the overall property.

This study aims to illustrate the disconnect in engagement between developers, builders and new home buyers in relation to sustainability certification and implementation.

The relationship between sustainability and value in property has been a major area of investigation over the past decade. However, in spite of the extant literature and research, the connections made by valuers in practice of the value relationship are still unresolved. The purpose of this paper is to investigate, in the Australian context, valuers’ perception of the relationship between sustainability and value; and their experience and knowledge of sustainability in valuation practice.

The research investigates valuers’ perception and knowledge of sustainability and its inclusion in valuation practice in Australia. The approach uses a longitudinal survey of valuers from 2007 to 2015 tracking valuers’ knowledge, understanding, inclusion of sustainability reporting and the perceptions of the relationship between sustainability and market value.

This paper presents findings from a longitudinal survey that has been conducted in Australia since 2007, identifying changes between 2007, the height of the property market and sustainability engagement prior to the global financial crisis, and the subsequent years to 2015. The growth of sustainability in the property market is significant, however, valuers’ knowledge and reporting on sustainability is not demonstrating the same level of development. As a result, this is inhibiting valuers reporting on sustainability and has implications for practice and treatment of market values.

This research highlights the need to examine how to assist valuers to more rapidly develop knowledge and experience to reflect the implications of change in practice. Current approaches being developed in the UK and Europe, like the introduction of RenoValue professional development programs and guidance documents, to assist valuers to develop their knowledge needs to be implemented in the Australian environment as current approaches are inadequate, and steps need to be taken in order to assist their development of knowledge and experience as the market demonstrates growth and acceptance of sustainability. This research identifies the need to re-examine how professional development is undertaken and knowledge developed by those practicing in the profession in Australia.

This longitudinal survey is the only research that has spanned a substantial period of time attempting to ascertain valuers’ perception of the relationship between sustainability and value; and attempts to track the knowledge development of valuers in the context of sustainability. The findings identify how the market is developing and adhering to a product model development theory, however, also identifies more fundamental issues and implications for valuation praxis, in the development of knowledge and ability of valuers to adapt to change and reflect these valuations.

Heritage buildings are significant for their historical and architectural value. Due to the lack of rating systems designed specifically for heritage buildings, it is essential to develop and validate a heritage building assessment tool that considers its specific characteristics. The purpose of this study is to provide an extensive review of research on Sustainability of Heritage Buildings (SHBs).

This review highlights methodologies applied in SHBs research and analyzes major global rating systems in order to identify their deficiencies for SHBs assessment. A systematic review was employed and articles from the top 10 high impact factor journals were studied. Twelve major global rating systems and their assessment criteria were identified.

Significant variability was observed among the assessment tools since each tool assesses several criteria, factors and indicators that fit its local context. Part of this variability can also be seen in the rating scales, threshold values and accreditation titles. As a result, the final sustainability ranking for a given building cannot be compared among the 12 rating systems. Most importantly, these systems fail to analyze some factors such as energy that are considered important with respect to heritage building assessment.

Since no specific rating system could be identified in this review as the most appropriate for heritage buildings, a new sustainability assessment tool that is specific to heritage buildings should be developed. Such a tool will enable facility managers to evaluate and improve the sustainability of their heritage buildings while preserving them.

Much rhetoric exists on the urgency of transitioning from current practices to a more sustainable society. However, because this imperative is guided by strong ideological overtones, weaknesses and failures in the transition effort attract inadequate scrutiny. This paper reviews Australia's progress with sustainability in an urban domain and identifies key issues hindering the sustainability transition effort.

Research on urban sustainability is ubiquitous but this weight of publications tends to emphasize technical, operational or prescriptive themes. This research uses an interpretivist philosophical lens and inductive reasoning to manually analyse pertinent literature sourced from the Scopus and Web of Science data-bases. Specifically, this study assembles outcome and evaluative assessments pertaining to Australia's urban sustainability efforts to identify both the progress achieved and residual structural impediments.

Emergent findings illustrate that Australia's urban sustainability goals, as expressed by the Paris Accord, have not been met. Obstruction can be attributed to over-ambitious objectives combined with weak federal leadership, under-resourced local government, over-reliance on superficial rating systems and an ineffective regulatory regime. Elite “green branding” by image conscious corporations are insufficient to offset the general disinterest of the unincentivized majority of building owners and developers.

This paper cogently summarizes Australia's urban sustainability status, along with complexity of the challenges it faces to meet targets set.

This study aims to build on a contextualised approach for revealing the particularities of social sustainability indicators on the building scale within the particular context of Jordan, focusing on the buildings of the Dahiyat Al Hussein suburb.

This study relied on a review of the relevant previous research as well as global, regional and local rating tools, followed by working with a diversified participant base comprising experts as well as users through Delphi rounds and analytic hierarchy process-based assessments.

This study resulted in several key indicators that were classified into three main categories: environmental friendliness, comfort and convenience and social blend. It resembled a step on the path towards the standardisation of context-specific social sustainability indicators, an effort that would be further supported by future research addressing other development within Jordan.

The sustainability debate has, for long, acquired the undivided attention of its key stakeholders. With the continuous rise of global attention, the conceptualisation of sustainability has grown more specialised in both function and scale, and sustainable measures have been developed at the macro and micro levels. With the further spread of the concept, recognition of its contextual differences between various countries became more vivid, where the social dimension attains particular importance.