Next Article in Journal
The Magnitude of Stress in the Prop Depending on Its Manual Tightening
Next Article in Special Issue
Assessment of Rainwater Treatment Using Sand and Gravel Filtration and Chlorine Disinfection for Non-Potable Domestic Reuse
Previous Article in Journal
Study on the Vibration Effects of Brick–Concrete Structures Induced by Blasting in Open-Pit Mines
Previous Article in Special Issue
Sustainable Investments in Construction: Cost–Benefit Analysis Between Rehabilitation and New Building in Romania
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Cost and Incentive Analysis of Green Building Label Upgrades in Taiwan’s Residential Sector: A Case Study of Silver to Gold EEWH Certification

Department of Land Economics, National Chengchi University, Taipei 11605, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2025, 15(16), 2956; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15162956
Submission received: 20 July 2025 / Revised: 14 August 2025 / Accepted: 18 August 2025 / Published: 20 August 2025

Abstract

In response to the global push for sustainable development, green building certification systems have become a key policy instrument for reducing carbon emissions in the construction sector. In Taiwan, the EEWH (Ecology, Energy Saving, Waste Reduction, and Health) system serves as the primary framework for evaluating building sustainability. However, while government incentives such as floor area ratio (FAR) bonuses aim to encourage adoption, private sector participation remains limited, especially in the residential sector. This study investigates the cost implications and incentive benefits of upgrading green building certification from the Silver level to the Gold level under the EEWH system, using eight collective housing projects in the Taipei metropolitan area as case studies. Through a detailed analysis of certification components, upgrade strategies, and construction cost estimates, this research quantifies the additional costs required for each sustainability indicator and evaluates the alignment between upgrade investments and incentive rewards. The findings reveal that the average cost increase associated with the Silver-to-Gold upgrade ranges between 1% and 3% of total construction costs, with certain design strategies offering high cost-effectiveness. Moreover, the study examines whether the current FAR bonus policy provides adequate motivation for developers to pursue higher certification levels. The results provide valuable insights for policymakers seeking to optimize incentive structures and for developers considering sustainable building investments.
Keywords: green building certification; EEWH; residential housing; cost analysis; incentive benefits; floor area ratio bonus; sustainable construction; Taiwan green building certification; EEWH; residential housing; cost analysis; incentive benefits; floor area ratio bonus; sustainable construction; Taiwan

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, Y.-A.; Su, F.-I.; Sun, C.-Y. Cost and Incentive Analysis of Green Building Label Upgrades in Taiwan’s Residential Sector: A Case Study of Silver to Gold EEWH Certification. Buildings 2025, 15, 2956. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15162956

AMA Style

Chen Y-A, Su F-I, Sun C-Y. Cost and Incentive Analysis of Green Building Label Upgrades in Taiwan’s Residential Sector: A Case Study of Silver to Gold EEWH Certification. Buildings. 2025; 15(16):2956. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15162956

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Yen-An, Fang-I Su, and Chen-Yi Sun. 2025. "Cost and Incentive Analysis of Green Building Label Upgrades in Taiwan’s Residential Sector: A Case Study of Silver to Gold EEWH Certification" Buildings 15, no. 16: 2956. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15162956

APA Style

Chen, Y.-A., Su, F.-I., & Sun, C.-Y. (2025). Cost and Incentive Analysis of Green Building Label Upgrades in Taiwan’s Residential Sector: A Case Study of Silver to Gold EEWH Certification. Buildings, 15(16), 2956. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15162956

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop