CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.4 Previous Studies
2.4.1 Comparative Analysis among Green Building Rating Systems
1. Comparative Analysis between the LEED and Green Globes Systems [85]:
The focal comparison of the study centres on LEED version 2.2 and Green Globes. Both systems pursue a common goal of greening the building in the U.S.
From a process perspective, Green Globes simpler methodology, which employs a user-friendly interactive guide for assessing and integrating green design principles for buildings, continues to be a point of differentiation to LEED is more
TOTAL SCORE
AWARD LEVEL
Ratings Award
≥86 76-85 66-75 50-65
Platinum Gold Silver Certified
33
complex and primarily paper based system. LEED introduced an online-based system; it remains more extensive and requires experts’ knowledge in various areas.
Any team member with general knowledge of the building’s parameters can complete Green Globes web based self-assessment tool, and it provides both PILOT (after assessing the schematic design) and final ratings during the assessment. In contrast, LEED tends to be more rigid, time-intensive, and expensive to administer. Overall, the two systems are quite comparable, and it is estimated that nearly 80% of available points in the Green Globes system are addressed in LEED 2.2 while over 85% of the points specified in LEED 2.2 are addressed in the Green Globes system. It is found that the study is not a comprehensive assessment of every criterion, sub-criteria, and methodological underpinning associated with each system. The result suggested in further research is required to determine whether potentially improvements across more categories can improve overall building performances.
2. Comparative Analysis among BREEAM, LEED, Green Globes, CASBEE and GB Tool [17]:
The study was prepared to provide information on sustainable building rating systems for U.S General Services Administration (GSA). Five rating system were reviewed in detail based on Federal and GSA drivers which are; BREEAM, LEED, Green Globes, CASBEE and GB Tool. GSA has identified that the ratings systems need to address the following elements:
• A system that is applicable to the large scale and complexity of federal building projects.
• A stable rating system such that the evaluation of building performance is not subject to drastic change
• A system that tracks quantifiable achievements in sustainable design and is verified by a third party qualified assessor.
• A system used in the current market with practitioner awareness.
34
The study does not provide a recommendation for GSA but a summary of comparative details on each rating systems using the review criteria developed by GSA and other Federal services.
3. A comparative analysis of two building rating systems : UK BREEAM and LEED Canada [86]:
The study compares the two most widely adopted schemes, the UK BREEAM and LEED, as implemented by the Canada Green Building Council. The aim of the paper is to determine the effectiveness of commonly used building rating systems and to propose improvements to these systems. The results show that BREEAM and LEED Canada have enabled the building industry to evaluate construction projects in an accessible manner, although both systems bear lack of consistency.
However, assessment consistency is not vital to the overall success of the operation-the desired market transformation is being observed despite the apparent limitation. Furthermore, the effect of building users’ actions on the structure’s performance should be incorporated into BREEAM and LEED Canada in the near future.
Despite the rapid growth of building assessment over the last 15 years, the construction industry is still undergoing a cultural shift towards the widespread use of such tools. While BREEAM and LEED Canada have been instrumental in fostering this change, both systems must continue to evolve in order to maintain the momentum developed thus far while expanding to include construction sectors and markets not currently undergoing assessment at the same time.
4. Comparative Analysis of GBRS among BREEAM, LEED, CASBEE, and Green Star [62]:
The environmental assessment methodologies covered in the report include BREEAM, LEED, CASBEE, and Green Star. The study looks at the most commonly used schemes and how all international GBRS compared to the local UK benchmark, called BREEAM. The results show that Green Star version 2.0 is almost identical to BREEAM 2002 as that is the version it was based on. At the time of development, there were credits that could not be applied to Australia,
35
such as change in ecological value and proximity to public transport, as these issues reflect regional norms. The compliance requirements and benchmark of these credits were therefore changed significantly. Since that initial work, the main change has been in progress, which is now more akin to LEED. On the other hand, CASBEE takes on a very different approach. In fact, more than half the credits in CASBEE do not have a BREEAM equivalent. It is therefore much more difficult to compare the rating bands of the two systems.
The comparison shows that it is tougher to meet the highest rating in BREEAM than it is to meet the requirements of the alternative schemes when building in the UK. If a building is designed to meet the highest LEED or Green Star rating, it is only likely to achieve a BREEAM rating of “Very Good” or
“Good” which are the second and third highest ratings respectively. The results from CASBEE are difficult to compare, as more than 50% of the criteria included in CASBEE are not relevant to a country that does not have a major risk of severe earthquakes or typhoons. The future directions stated in the study suggested developing a set of underpinning standards that exclude as much “home territory regulatory effects” as possible to facilitate comparisons.
Justification
Many existing GBRSs vary enormously both in their complexity and in their application. Although there has been an attempt to design rating system applicable to multiple countries, however this effort is considered futile and often ends with GBRS of a significant local favor. This explains why comparisons between the GBRS are necessary. Therefore, this research carried out a comparative analysis of GBI with other GBRS around the world to add knowledge in this particular area. The difference with previous study is this research covered six GBRSs, which are BREEAM, LEED, CASBEE, Green Star, Green Mark and Green Building Index. The comparative analysis is based on the certification process, criteria, and rating award.
36