Special Issue "Sustainability Rating Tools in the Built Environment"

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 September 2021.

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Georgia Warren-Myers
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
the Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, the University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia
Interests: real estate valuation; economics and development; sustainability; climate change; sustainable construction; housing affordability
Special Issues and Collections in MDPI journals
Dr. Christopher Jensen
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Australia
Interests: Building Performance, Energy Modelling, Sustainable Design, Building Innovation

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues, 

The concept of sustainability has been around for decades, though has more recently come to the forefront in the built environment through the proliferation and uptake of rating tools used to assess, measure, and capture the sustainability impacts of homes, commercial buildings, and precincts. Some tools deal with singular aspects whilst other tools have been developed with broader and holistic objectives covering multiple environmental, social, and financial considerations. Much research has gone into the development of these tools, and literally hundreds of different rating tools and systems are found globally. However, some key tools have gained substantial traction in commercial and residential buildings and community development, namely LEED, BREEAM, Green Star, and Energy Star, to name but a few.

Rating tools in the built environment have been variously utilised as forms of ‘sticks’ or ‘carrots’; either as minimum standards requirements and/or incentivised best practice, either directly or indirectly. They have been applied in numerous formats around the world by various levels of government as a mandatory approach to ensuring minimum standards, or for reporting against aspirational levels of energy efficiency or sustainability. Meanwhile, industries have grasped certain tools that have been utilised to differentiate their product, firm, and clients from those of their competitors, in addition to receiving the financial benefits that can be achieved. 

The purpose of this Special issue is to explore and open up the discussion on the less frequently considered aspects of:

  • How these tools have been used, and their varying success as a mandatory or voluntary instruments;
  • Closing the loop—investigations on the relationships between the typically design-orientated tools, the actual as-built form, and the operational performance as well as what can be learned from increased analysis across the lifecycle;
  • The value implications over time of having sustainably rated buildings and obsolescence issues;
  • Implications for the market—are consumers and other stakeholders being bamboozled by rating systems, especially Stars, that they are losing their meaning, leading to less trust in these systems; and
  • The challenge of how existing credentials of well-known rating tools or new tools for the built environment can be leveraged to generate broadscale change to tackle climate change challenges and mitigate and adapt to form more resilient built environments. 

This Special Issue will contribute to the continuing global development of rating tool analysis and implementation, and perhaps identify pathways for more holistic approaches to the development, usability, and application of sustainability rating tools that make a real difference for improved environmental, social, and financial outcomes as well as in emissions reductions and generating greater resilience in response to the challenges of climate change.

Dr. Georgia Warren-Myers
Dr. Christopher Jensen
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Sustainability 
  • Rating tools 
  • Green Buildings 
  • Built Environment mitigation and adaptation

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Article
Stakeholder’s Perspective on Green Building Rating Systems in Saudi Arabia: The Case of LEED, Mostadam, and the SDGs
Sustainability 2021, 13(15), 8463; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158463 - 29 Jul 2021
Viewed by 430
Abstract
This paper discusses in detail the current level of awareness of the Saudi Arabia stakeholders regarding the use and application of green building rating systems. The paper used a mix of qualitative and quantitative research methods through an exploratory method that utilized an [...] Read more.
This paper discusses in detail the current level of awareness of the Saudi Arabia stakeholders regarding the use and application of green building rating systems. The paper used a mix of qualitative and quantitative research methods through an exploratory method that utilized an online survey targeting experts and construction stakeholders to fill the gap of previous research papers and support the argument of the increase in the level of the awareness of stakeholders in the use and application of green building rating systems in Saudi Arabia. This research aims to focus on the level of awareness of the Saudi construction market stakeholders on green building rating systems in Saudi Arabia with focus on the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design system LEED and Mostadam. It also investigated which rating system responds to the need of the Saudi construction market with regard to energy conservation and water consumption more effectively. The methodology utilized in this research used a combination of primary and secondary data where the primary data were a survey sent to Saudi construction stakeholders where a total of 1320 respondents participated in the survey. Results from this research showed a promising number of agreements between the participating stakeholders to the level of awareness of green building rating systems in Saudi Arabia and to the willingness to use internationally recognized rating systems such as LEED and the use of locally recognized systems such as Mostadam. Furthermore, the research aims to link the results with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with a focus on SDGs 6 and 7. The results show a high level of appreciation and agreement to the importance of energy and water conservation in green buildings that will be using either LEED or Mostadam in Saudi Arabia and accomplish the targets outlined under the SDGs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainability Rating Tools in the Built Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
User Experience of Green Building Certification Resources: EarthCraft Multifamily
Sustainability 2021, 13(14), 7871; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147871 - 14 Jul 2021
Viewed by 327
Abstract
To improve the construction industry’s capacity to deliver sustainable infrastructure, guidance on delivering green building systems needs to be more usable. Green buildings have certifications and ratings in place that ensure that projects are environmentally responsible and meet standards in resource efficiency. EarthCraft [...] Read more.
To improve the construction industry’s capacity to deliver sustainable infrastructure, guidance on delivering green building systems needs to be more usable. Green buildings have certifications and ratings in place that ensure that projects are environmentally responsible and meet standards in resource efficiency. EarthCraft Multifamily (ECMF), an evolving green building certification, has been successful in increasing the delivery of energy-efficient affordable housing, and this study leverages user experience (UX) methodologies to understand how to further improve ECMF and replicate its success. This study identifies the impact ECMF tools and resources, such as the program manual, worksheet, and technical guidelines, have on enhancing project delivery for architects. This study conducted data analysis on project specifications, heuristic evaluation data, and stakeholder interview data. As the strengths and weaknesses of ECMF were identified, knowledge on the usability of the green building certification program was unveiled. Heuristic evaluations data show that accessibility and usability issues are present in ECMF resources. Interview data show that architects’ experiences with ECMF resources were affected by some of the usability issues identified in the heuristic evaluation data. Coded interview transcripts show the most prominent participant-identified improvements represented within the data. Resources need appropriate visual representation such as readability and hierarchy to improve their usability. Understanding how ECMF resources are utilized during project delivery allows for the appropriate content and options to be strategically framed to improve accessibility and enhance user decision making. ECMF resources can allow for the inclusion of a broader set of stakeholders by lowering the level of expertise required for sustainable infrastructure delivery. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainability Rating Tools in the Built Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Readiness Assessment of Green Building Certification Systems for Residential Buildings during Pandemics
Sustainability 2021, 13(2), 460; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020460 - 06 Jan 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1133
Abstract
One of the consequences of COVID-19 pandemic is the momentum it has created for global changes affecting various aspects of daily lives. Among these, green building certification systems (GBCSs) should not be left behind as significant potential modifications may be required to ensure [...] Read more.
One of the consequences of COVID-19 pandemic is the momentum it has created for global changes affecting various aspects of daily lives. Among these, green building certification systems (GBCSs) should not be left behind as significant potential modifications may be required to ensure their versatility for residential buildings due to the new pandemic reality. The present study aims to evaluate the readiness of chosen GBCSs for a proper assessment of existing residential housing sustainability in a post-pandemic world. Based on a literature review of the state-of-the-art data sources and round table discussions, the present study proposes a particular set of sustainability indicators covering special sustainability requirements under pandemic conditions. Then, those indicators are used to evaluate the readiness of selected GBCSs (BREEAM, LEED, WELL, CASBEE) to meet new pandemic-resilient requirements based on their responses to the indicators. The assessment shows that none of the reviewed GBCSs are fully ready to cover all the proposed indicators. GBCSs have differing focuses on particular sustainability pillars, which also affected their responses to pandemic-resilient categories. For instance, WELL rating system successfully responded to the health and safety category, whereas LEED showed better preparedness in terms of environmental efficiency. BREEAM and CASBEE systems have a more evenly distributed attention to all three pandemic-resilient categories (Health & Safety, Environmental Resources Consumption, and Comfort) with an accent on the Comfort category. On a specific note, all GBCSs are insufficiently prepared for waste and wastewater management. In the future, GBCSs should be modified to better adapt to pandemic conditions, for which the current work may provide a basis. As an alternative, brand new standards can be created to face newly arising and evolving post-pandemic requirements. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainability Rating Tools in the Built Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop