Sustainability Assessment of Buildings Indicators: Comparison
Please note this is a comparison between Version 1 by João Delgado and Version 2 by Dean Liu.

The building sector is responsible for a high environmental impact, namely during construction, maintenance, demolition, and lifetime. It is then urgent to develop tools for guiding all stockholders to make buildings more sustainable. In order to make the sustainability assessment of a building, it is necessary to make a survey of the most appropriate parameters for this analysis and organize them hierarchically.

  • green buildings
  • rating systems
  • sustainability assessment systems

1. Sustainability Certification Tools for Buildings

Parallel to academic research, government-owned/non-profit organizations onset the development of building certification tools. The first building certification tool was developed in the UK in 1990, and it was called BREEAM (Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method) [1][46]. Some years later, France published a new tool, the HQE (High environmental quality), while in 1998, the USA launched the LEED tool (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). With the arrival of the new millennium, more certification systems were developed. In Portugal, the LiderA system was disclosed in 2000 and more recently, in 2017, the SBToolPT Urban, a branch of the SBTool, was reported by U. Minho [2][3][47,48].
The two best-known rating tools are BREEAM and LEED. BREEAM can be applied to several types of buildings, such as new constructions, infrastructures, in-use or refurbishment, while LEED has different guidelines for building design + construction, residential, operations + maintenance, among others. The present manuscript addresses the International New Construction Documentation by BREEAM and the Building Design and Construction guide by LEED [2][3][47,48]. BREEAM International New Construction 2016 has 10 different categories–9 environmental and 1 innovation category–and assessment issues, as shown in Table 12.
Table 12. BREEAM International New Construction 2016 categories and assessment issues (Adapted from [4][49]).
  • ▪ The building must use reasonable LEED boundaries.
  • ▪ The building must comply with project size requirements.
Management Health and Wellbeing
BREEAM Rating % Score
Project brief and design
* Minimum indoor air quality performance
Visual comfort
LEED for neighborhood development location * Construction activity pollution prevention Life cycle cost and service life planning Indoor air quality
* Environmental tobacco smoke control Sensitive land protection * Environmental site assessment Responsible construction practices Safe containment in laboratories
* Minimum acoustic performance High-priority site and equitable development Site assessment Commissioning and handover Thermal comfort
Aftercare Acoustic performance
 
Enhanced indoor air quality strategies Surrounding density and diverse uses Accessibility
  Hazards
Protect or restore habitat   Private space
  Water quality
Energy Transport
Low-emitting materials Access to quality transit Open space
Construction indoor air quality management plan Bicycle facilities Rainwater management
Indoor air quality assessment Reduced parking footprint Great island reduction
Thermal comfort Electric vehicles Light pollution reduction
Interior lighting   Site master plan
Daylight   Tenant design and construction guidelines
A minimum of 40 points are required to obtain a positive certification. The four levels of certifications are displayed in Table 5.
Table 45. LEED certification levels.
LEED Certification Total Points
Reduction of energy use and carbon emissions
Quality views
Public transport accessibility
 
Places of respite
, 3 of them are composite indicators (Life cycle Global Warming Potential, Construction and demolition waste and materials and Indoor air quality), five of them are qualitative (Lighting and visual comfort, Acoustics and protection against noise, Increased risk of extreme weather events, Increased risk of flood events and Value creation and risk exposure) and one (Bill of quantities, materials and lifespans) is reported as information reporting.
Table 67. Level(s) macro-objectives and their corresponding indicators (Adapted from [7]).
Level(s) macro-objectives and their corresponding indicators (Adapted from [51]).
  • ▪ Achieving a sustainable renovation;
  • ▪ Sustainability has a positive influence on the market value of a property.
Greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions along a building’s life cycle Use stage energy performance
Energy monitoring
Proximity to amenities
Lifecycle Global Warming Potential
Resource-efficient and circular material life cycles Bill of quantities, materials and lifespans
Acoustic performance
 
Construction & demolition waste and materials Direct exterior access
Design for adaptability and renovation External lighting
Alternative modes of transport

2. Compilation of Sustainability Indicators

SAfter a thorough literature review, sustainability indicators proposed by the present work were compiled into a single list. They were divided into five levels of weighting, where a higher weight was assigned to the indicators shared by an increased number of reviewed rating systems of sustainability. The indicators with higher weights are shown in Table 78, and the others with the lowest weights are shown in Table 89.
Table 78. Compiled sustainability indicators of the reviewed ratings systems. Higher weighting is related to a higher number of sustainability rating systems that use them.
Weight Environment Social Economic
Environment Social Economic
Workers’ and personnel’s health and safety Migration effects Effects on national economy
Loss of habitats, agricultural farms and trees Social responsibility Use of national resources
Construction water quality impact Social action funding/Concepts of social justice Enhancement in the capacity of infrastructure
Considering the life cycle of products and services to reduce environmental impacts Corporate sustainability and organizational culture Effects on trade balance (national/regional)
Design for deconstruction, reuse and recycling
 
 
Joint use of facilities
Low carbon design Maximum car parking capacity
Water Efficiency
Platinum 80+
6.
Table 56. Level(s) macro-objectives and their definition (Adapted from [7]).
Level(s) macro-objectives and their definition (Adapted from [51]).
Level(s) Macro-Objectives Definition
Efficient use of water resources
Project biodiversity
Labor practices Financing (loan interests)
Use stage water consumption
Healthy and comfortable spaces Indoor air quality
Time outside of thermal comfort range
Environmental impact assessment project report Needs assessment of society/people Opportunity-cost
Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) control Human rights Cost of equipment and their installationLighting and visual comfort
Carbon dioxide monitoring and control Employee commitment/commitment in the workplace Distributed income innovation and technological advance
Energy and Atmosphere Materials and Resources
Energy-efficient cold storage Travel plan
Acoustics and protection against noise
Minimum IAQ performance Project independence of political factors
Envelope Insulation Social impact reports Stakeholder involvement/participation Adaptation and resilience to climate change Protection of occupier health and thermal comfort * Outdoor water use reduction * Fundamental commissioning and verification * Storage and collection of recyclables construction and demolition Energy-efficient transport systems
* Indoor water use reduction 
Use of environmentally friendly refrigerants and cleaning materials, effective and low-carbon cleaning equipment and machinery Transparent and competitive procurement processes Target marketing and benefits Increased risk of extreme weather events
Renewable raw materials Absence of bureaucracy in the workplace Effective project control Increased risk of flood events Well-defined project scope and project limitations * Minimum energy performance * Waste management planning
Flood risk assessment strategy to prevent flooding Holistic view of benefits Energy-efficient laboratory systems  
* Building-level water metering
Hazardous degradable wastes Contractor–supplier relationship Best practice strategy Optimized life cycle cost and value Life cycle costs
Hazardous non-degradable wastes Commitment to the stakeholders’ needs Customer-relationship management/Access to a range of customers Value creation and risk exposure Scope control through managing changes * Building-level energy metering
Air Pollution Product–service systems* PBT source reduction-Mercury Energy-efficient equipment  
Outdoor water use reduction * Fundamental refrigerant management Building lifecycle impact reduction Drying space  
Business ethics
Violation of animal’s territory Emphasis on high-quality workmanship Facility management Technologies/general improvements Indoor water use reduction Enhanced commissioning Building product disclosure and optimization-EDP
Durable materials Encourage competition Water Materials
Optimize process water use Optimize energy performance Building product disclosure and optimization-Sourcing of raw materials
Non-renewable energy Implementing a quality management system Supply chain collaboration Water consumption
Water meteringLife cycle impacts
Advanced energy metering Building product disclosure and optimization-Material ingredients
Reuse of processed water First mover advantage Effective strategic planning Water monitoring Hard landscaping and boundary protection
  Grid harmonization PBT source reduction-Mercury
Non-hazardous recyclable wastes Culture of accountability Organizational culture Water leak detection Responsible sourcing of materials
  Renewable energy PBT source reduction-Lead, cadmium, and copper
Non-hazardous non-recyclable wastes Comprehensive contract documentation Project outputs emphasis Water efficient equipment Insulation
  Enhanced refrigerant management
Environmental management plan for impacts by the Project Management Team (PMT) DiversificationFurniture and medical furnishings   Designing for durability and resilience
Ability to pay and affordability     Design for flexibility  
Sustainable project delivery through project stakeholder management Competitive tendering/comprehensive pre-tender investigation of the project Environmental/economics accounting Material efficiency
Waste Land use and ecology
Construction waste management Site selection
Recycled aggregates
    Construction and demolition waste managementEcological value of site and protection of ecological features
Environmental education and training Adaptability in project environment Integrative Process Innovation Regional Priority
* Integrative project planning and design Innovation Regional priority Operational waste Minimizing impact on existing site ecology
Integrative Process LEED accredited professional Speculative floor and ceiling finishes Enhancing site ecology
Adaptation to climate change Long-term impact on biodiversity
Functional adaptability  
Pollution Innovation
Impact of refrigerants Innovation
NOx emissions  
Surface water run-off  
Reduction of nighttime light pollution  
Reduction of noise pollution
There are minimum BREEAM’s standards for key categories to ensure that the performance of all fundamental environmental is not overlooked; these key categories are namely Energy, Water, Waste, Management, Health, and Wellbeing. Depending on the type of building and location–according to Köppen-Geiger climate classification, different categories will receive different weightings.
Each category has several credits. During the building assessment, the total number of credits achieved is determined. For each category, the fraction of credits obtained (ratio between the number of credits obtained and the maximum number of credits for this category) is multiplied by the category weighting, giving out the category score (in %). Adding the 10 category scores, the final BREEM score is obtained. The final score is then categorized into one of the final six BREEAM ratings, as shown in Table 23.
Table 23. BREEAM rating benchmarks.
Eco-efficiency
Intangible asset management
Developing an efficient risk management plan by the PMT
Consistent and predictable load
Multidisciplinary/competent Project Management Team (PMT)
Up-to-date environmental construction technologies and methods
The role of trust within the PMT
Implementing an effective change management strategy
Environmental responsibility/justice
Following project management phases/processes
Identify and address choke points
Project manager’s leadership style
Efficient data processing for decision-making practices
Appropriate and flexible environmental design details and specifications Employing operational decision-making techniques by the PMT
Mold Prevention Project monitoring and evaluation by the PMT, though previous experiences in projects
Outstanding ≥85
Excellent ≥70
Very Good ≥55
Good ≥45
Pass ≥30
Unclassified <30
In order to achieve a given BREEAM rating, the minimum overall score must be met, as well as the minimum standards established for said rating. The LEED certification tool–v4.1 Building Design and Construction–has some similarities to the BREEAM rating tool. Instead of minimum standards, the LEED certification tool has prerequisites and credits for the different categories. The distribution is shown in Table 34, where prerequisites start with an asterisk (*).
Table 34. LEED v4.1 Building Design + Construction Scorecard (prerequisites start with an asterisk *) (Adapted from [5]).
LEED v4.1 Building Design + Construction Scorecard (prerequisites start with an asterisk *) (Adapted from [50]).
Indoor Environmental Quality Location and Transportation Sustainable Sites
Unlike BREEAM, not all prerequisites and credits are assessed for a given building type. The full scorecard shows which categories need to be assessed, and the maximum number of points for categories of LEED scores goes up to 110 possible points. The building also needs to meet the three LEED Minimum Program Requirements:
  • ▪ The building must be in a permanent location on existing land.
Bureaucratic streamlining
Sustainable maintenance
Managing knowledge and awareness to promote sustainable project delivery (PMT)
Internationalization
Acidification potential
Management considerations toward safety
Cargo delivery route & proximity
Establish environmental policy and end-user guide, and manual
Affordability
Neighborhood accessibility and amenities
Expenditure on R&D
Low-carbon design
Maximum car parking capacity
Lifecycle costs
1-
Greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions along a building life cycle
Minimize the total greenhouse gas emissions along a building’s life cycle, from the cradle to the grave, with a focus on emissions from building operational energy use and embodied energy.
Gold 60–79
Silver 50–59
Certified 40–49
The developed sustainability assessment tools assigned different names to similar categories. While BREEAM and LEED sustainability assessment tools share common names such as “Energy”, “Water”, and “Materials”, there are some categories that are only found in some of these two tools (for example, LEED has the “Sustainable Sites” category, while BREEAM has the “Management”). Zulkefli et al. [6][43] compared the indicators of different rating tools and organized them into the primary themes of sustainability (Environment, Social and Economic Indicators). A total of 87 indicators were proposed to assess the sustainability of buildings.
In 2015, the European Commission started the development of a common European approach to assessing the environmental performance of buildings. The proposed tool, which is still under development, is known as Level(s), which is a framework that has core indicators of sustainability for buildings [5][50]. The tool has been developed with six macro-objectives in mind, as depicted in Table 5
Environmental management systems/policy implications
Grid harmonization
Places of respite
Reserve funds
5 Renewable energy Design considerations toward safety Innovation management/new product development
2-
Resource-efficient and circular material life cycles
Optimize the building design, engineering and form in order to support lean and circular flows, extend the long-term material utility and reduce significant environmental impacts.
Thermal comfort Acoustic and noise control
3-
Efficient use of water resources
Make efficient use of water resources, particularly in areas of identified long-term or projected water stress.
Site selection
4-
Healthy and comfortable spaces
Create buildings that are comfortable, attractive and productive to live and work in and which protect human health.
4 Recycled/reused materials Public transportation access & transportation plan Use of regional resources
5-
Adaptation and resilience to climate change
Futureproof building performance against projected future changes in the climate in order to protect occupier health and comfort and to minimize long-term risks to property values and investments.
Indoor air quality performance Thermal comfort
6-
Optimized lifecycle cost and value
Optimize the life cycle cost and value of buildings to reflect the potential for long- term performance improvement, inclusive of acquisition, operation, maintenance, refurbishment, disposal and end of life.
Out of the 16 core indicators presented in Table 67
The Level (s) framework is divided into three levels. The first level regards the conceptual design for the building project. It is the simplest level, in which early-stage qualitative assessments are applied to the conceptual design or concepts of the building. The second level covers the detailed design and construction performance of the building. This intermediate level entails quantitative assessments of the designed performance and monitoring of the building. The third and final level encompasses the as-built and in-use performance of the building after completion. It is the most advanced level, and it entails the monitoring and surveying of activity on the construction site and the building, as well as its occupants. The higher the level, the more accurate and reliable the report will be, but the framework is built so that one can choose which level/combination of levels to work at [8][52].
Finally, Level(s) has four briefings on the key concepts of the framework, as follows:
  • ▪ Whole life cycle and circular thinking;
  • ▪ Closing the gap between design and actual building performance;
Daylight
3
Climate Change
Visual quality Cost of construction
Noise Pollution Employment (social aspects)
Energy Efficiency Infrastructure improvement
Indoor air quality Community relationships and involvement Cost of operation and maintenance
Public acceptance of the project
Visual comfort Stakeholder engagement/management
Sustainable development supported by local laws
2 Climate change adaptation/disaster risk management Public Comfort Regional workers and personnel
Cultural heritage Supply and demand sides
Recycled water Natural heritage Marketing price
Destruction of the stratospheric ozone layer Workers and personnel comfort Return on Investment
Durability of building
Efficient lighting Post-occupancy user satisfaction survey (to assess end-user comfort) Direct job opportunities
Sensitive land protection Indirect job opportunities
Public health and safety Economic and political stability
Table 89.
Compiled sustainability indicators with the lowest weights (weight equal to 1).
As shown in Table 78, the most prevalent indicators in the Environment pillar are “Renewable energy”, “Thermal comfort”, and “Site selection”. In the Social Pillar, the most used indicators are “Design considerations towards safety” and “Acoustic and noise control”. Finally, in the Economic Pillar, the most mentioned indicator is “Innovation management/new product development”.
A total of 153 indicators were identified. The Social Pillar has the highest number of indicators at 56. It is followed by the Environmental Pillar with 54 indicators, and lastly, by the Economic Pillar with 43 indicators.
ScholarVision Creations