1.

Third International Conference on Construction in Developing Countries (ICCIDCIII) Advancing Civil, Architectural and Construction Engineering & Management !ul" #$%, &'(&, )ang*o*, Thailand

(Paper 87, ID 118)

Comparative Study of Rating Systems for Green Building in Developing and Developed Countries
Vyas Gayatri Sachin (Indian Institute of Delhi, India, ga"atri+v"as(,"ahoo-com. Jha K. N. (Indian Institute of Delhi, India, *n/ha,civil-iitd-ac-in.

Abstract
Construction sector is one of the largest end users of environmental resources and one of the largest polluters of manmade and natural environments around the glo e. Green uildings have e!perienced rapid gro"th in the past several years. Rating systems have een developed to measure the sustaina ility level of green uildings. #he purpose of rating systems is to certify the different aspects of sustaina le development during the planning and construction stages and to incorporate est$practice e!perience for achieving higher certification level. #he study reported in this paper is part of a roader study "here the o %ectives are& '() to compare different rating systems used in developing and developed countries* '+) to identify the roles and limitations of current environmental uilding assessment methods in ascertaining uilding sustaina ility in developing countries* and ',) to compute sustaina ility and composite inde! using -./ y utili0ing the frame"or1 suggested y Ding '+223). 4nly the first o %ective is addressed and riefly reported in this paper. 5n the conte!t of 5ndia it is found that the rating systems do not consider economic and climatic conditions. #his study may e useful to all the sta1eholders involved in the evaluation of green uilding.

Keywords
Green uilding* rating system* sustaina le development

(. 5ntroduction
5ndia is the seventh largest country in the "orld. 5t has a leading economy and it is home to over one illion people living in various climatic 0ones. Construction plays a very important role in the country6s economy contri uting 7.( percent of the GD/. Commercial and residential sectors are ma%or mar1ets for the construction industry. #hese sectors consume a lot of energy throughout the life cycle of uildings* thus ecoming a ma%or contri utor to greenhouse gas emissions. -s a first step to"ards green development* Government of 5ndia mandated several corporate organisations and institutions to use green practices in their ne" construction. #he green uilding is a uilding that has high$efficiency in the use and consumption of natural resources* "ater* energy* and materials that are used throughout uilding6s life$ cycle i.e. design* construction* operation* maintenance* renovation* and demolition. Green uilding practices can su stantially reduce

negative environmental impacts. Green uilding reduces operating costs* enhances uilding mar1eta ility* and helps in increasing "or1ers6 productivity and health enefits. #he environmental enefits include conservation of natural resources* "aste reduction* improvement of air and "ater 8uality* and protection of the ecosystem. Green uilding rating systems are designed to assess and evaluate the performance of uildings from planning* designing* constructing* and operations. Rating system guidelines and standards can e categori0ed into t"o groups& those "hich concentrate on specific uilding components or areas* and those "hich identify the uildings as a "hole evaluation entity. -s the concentrations of different rating systems vary* the same uilding can e green credited y one "hile failed to e credited y another at the same time. Sathyanarayanan '+229) reports that in terms of construction "or1ers6 health and safety there is vey little difference et"een green and non$green pro%ects. .e e!claims further that it is not "ise to say such uildings as sustaina le in terms of "or1ers6 health and safety. 5ndia has a varying range of geographic features from north to south and from east to "est. Climatic conditions also vary in these regions thus it is felt prudent to consider climatic condition of the region in a green uilding rating system. 5n this study different green uilding rating systems have een compared and classified roadly under developed countries li1e the :S-* :K* and developing countries li1e 5ndia and China. 5n the ne!t section* an overvie" of green uilding rating systems is presented. #hese systems are su se8uently compared on certain important issues such as life cycle assessment* rene"a ility* forest certification* locally produced materials* health and safety of construction "or1er* pro%ect management* and climatic conditions. Su se8uently* the results are discussed riefly and conclusions presented.

+. -n overvie" of Green Building Rating Systems

+.( BR;;-< $+2(( NC Rating System #he BR;;-< 'Building Research ;sta lishment6s ;nvironmental -ssessment <ethod) "as first launched in (992 and "as the first green uilding performance assessment method. #his method "as developed in the :K. #he BR;;-<$+2(( NC assesses the performance of the uilding. #his rating system is divided in the follo"ing areas& management$(+=* energy use$(9=* health and "ell$ eing$(>=* pollution$(+=* transport$7=* land use and ecology$(2=* materials$(,=* "aste $ 3.>= "ater$?= and innovation "here the percentage values represent the "eights given to the respective parameter in the rating system. #he BR;;-< rating system is designed for courts* eco homes* education* industrial* healthcare* multi$ residential* offices and ne" construction. Building life cycle stages covered y the BR;;-<$+2(( NC are design stage and post construction stage. - certificate of the assessment result is a"arded to the individual uilding ased on single rating scheme of outstanding* e!cellent* very good* good* pass* unclassified "ith percentage score 7>* 32* >>* @>* ,2* less than ,2 respectively. #he BR;;-< rating system has made an impact "orld"ide* "ith Canada* -ustralia* .ong Kong* Netherland and other countries using the BR;;-< methodology in developing their o"n environmental uilding assessment methods. #he assessment methods and tools are all designed to help construction professionals understand and mitigate the environmental impacts of the developments they design and uild. -s BR;;-< is predominately a design$stage assessment* it is important to incorporate details into the design as early as possi le. By doing this* it "ill e easier to o tain a higher rating and a more cost$ effective result. #he methods and tools cover different scales of construction activity. #he BR;;-< development is useful at the master planning stage for large development sites li1e ne" settlements and communities. +.+ A;;D$+2(( for 5ndia NC Rating System #he A;;D 'Aeadership in ;nergy and ;nvironmental Design) rating system has een developed y the

:.S. Green Building Council ':SGBC) in +222. #he A;;D 5ndia green uilding rating system "as developed y 5GBC '5ndian Green Building Council) in 4cto er +22?. #he A;;D$+2(( for 5ndia NC rating system is categori0ed into sustaina le sites$+,.?,=* "ater efficiency$ 9.(=* energy and atmosphere$,(.7+=* materials and resources$(+.3,=* indoor environmental 8uality$(,.?,=* innovation in design $>.@>= and regional priority $,.?@ =. #he A;;D assessment tool is developed for ne" construction* e!isting uildings* commercial interiors* core and shell* homes* neigh orhood development* school* and retail. #his system a"ards rating of uildings as certified* silver* gold* and platinum. 5t uses simple chec1list format to rate uilding performance. #he rating system contains one element* indoor air 8uality '5-B) management during construction that e!plicitly addresses construction "or1er safety and health. #he intent of this element is to protect the construction "or1ers and uilding occupants from potential air 8uality pro lems during the construction or renovation process. 4n successful implementation of an 5-B management plan* the pro%ect receives one A;;D$NC credit* "hich is almost negligi le and thus underscores the minimal consideration that the rating system gives to construction "or1er safety and health. 5t should e noted* ho"ever* that other elements "ithin the rating system "hich are aimed to improve the safety and health of the end$user* such as the use of lo"$emitting materials* may enefit the safety and health of construction "or1ers as "ell. +., DGNB Rating System #he DGNB 'GeSBC$ German Sustaina le Building Certificate) rating system "as founded in June +223 y German Cederal <inistry of #ransport* Construction and :r an Development. #he certification "as introduced to the real estate mar1et in January +229. #he DGNB rating system is divided into process 8uality$++.>=* technical 8uality$++.>=* ecological 8uality$++.>=* economical 8uality$++.>=* and social 8uality$ (2=. /urpose of the DGNB certificate is the application for uildings of any 1ind li1e offices* high$rises* detached residential homes* infra$ structure uildings etc. Aevel of certification in the DGNB is ron0e* silver and gold. #he goal of rating system is to create living environments that are environmentally compati le* resource$friendly* and economical and that safeguards the health* comfort and performance of their users. +.@ Green Star Rating System Green Star rating system has een uilt on e!isting systems and tools in overseas mar1ets* including the British BR;;-< 'Building Research ;sta lishment ;nvironmental -ssessment <ethod) system and the North -merican A;;D 'Aeadership in ;nergy and ;nvironmental Design) system* y esta lishing individual environmental measurement criteria relevant to the -ustralian mar1etplace and environmental conte!t. Green Star certification identifies pro%ects that have demonstrated a commitment to sustaina ility y designing* constructing* or o"ning a uilding to a determined standard. #he rating standard is divided under management* indoor environment 8uality* energy* transport* "ater* material* land consumption and use* emission and innovation. Aevel of certification for this system is from 2 to ? stars. Revie" of the a ove three ma%or sustaina le rating systems reveals an a sence of construction "or1er safety and health consideration. #his indicates that the uilding industry6s current perspective of sustaina ility is ased on the principles of resource efficiency and the health and productivity of the uilding6s occupants. +.> GR5.- Rating System GR5.- 'Green Rating for 5ntegrated .a itat -ssessment) is the 5ndian national green uilding rating system. 5t "as developed y #;R5 '# he ;nergy and Resources 5nstitute) in +223. #his rating system is divided into& sustaina le site planning$+(.+=* health and "ell eing$ 9.?=* uilding planning and construction$3.3=* energy& end use$,?.>=* energy& rene"a le$ 3.3=* recycle* recharge and reuse of

"ater$?.3=* "aste management$@.7=* uilding operation and maintenance$(.9=* and innovation points$ ,.9=. #he GR5.- rates the uildings from >2$?2 one star* ?($32 t"o stars* 3($72 three stars* 7($92 four stars* and a ove 92 = five stars. - uilding is assessed ased on its predicted performance over its entire life cycle D from inception to operation. #he stages of the life cycle that have een identified for evaluation are& pre$construction* uilding design* and construction* and uilding 4 E < 'operation and maintenance). #he issues that are addressed in these stages are as follo"s. /re$construction stage 'intra$ and inter$site issues) Building planning and construction stages 'issues of resource conservation and reduction in resource demand resource utili0ation efficiency* resource recovery and reuse* and provisions for occupant health and "ell$ eing). #he prime resources that are considered in this section are land* "ater* energy* air* and green cover. Building 4E< stage 'issues of 4E< of uilding systems and processes* monitoring and recording of consumption* and occupant health and "ell$ eing* and also issues that affect the glo al and local environment). +.? GB-S$ China China6s green uilding assessment method "as introduced in +22? and is a credit$ ased system. #his standard is applica le for evaluation of e!isting residential uildings* and three 1inds of pu lic uildings& office uildings* mall uildings* and hotel uildings. Green uilding evaluation indicators system consists of si! indicators that are& land$saving and outdoor environment$ 7 items* energy$saving and energy utili0ation$ ? items* "ater$saving and "ater resources utili0ation$ ? items* materials$saving and materials resources utili0ation$3 items* indoor environment 8uality$? items and operation management$3 items. #his system certifies uildings from ( to , stars.

, Comparison of different green uilding rating system

#a le ( sho"s the comparison et"een different green uilding rating system. #he sym ol indicates presence or consideration of the issue in 8uestion in the given rating system. #he sym ol F indicates a sence. Cor e!ample* life cycle assesement is presentGconsidered in the four rating systems& BR;;-<* A;;D* DGNB* and GR5.-* "hile this is not considered in Green Star and GB-S rating systems. #he results are discussed in the follo"ing section. #a le (& Comparison of Green Building Rating System
5ssue Aife Cycle -ssessment 'AC-)( Aife Cycle cost Rene"a ility+ Certification of materials used, Aocally /roduced <aterials@ .ealth and safety of construction "or1er>
(

BR;; -< F

Height

A;; D

Heig ht

DGN B F

Heig ht

Green Star F

Heigh t

GR5.-

Height

GB-S F

Height

(= ?= F (= += (= (@= F

3= @= 2.>= ,=

F F

7= (= +=

((= 7= 2.>= +=

F F F

(2= F >= F

AC- is a "ay of evaluating materials over their entire lives ased on measura le environmental impactsI it eliminates su %ectivity from the %udgment process.

(2$years rotation is ar itraryI preference should e given to all rene"a le materials "ith an emphasis on those sho"n to e superior through AC-. , /oints should e given to "ood that comes from a sustaina le source and is certified through any credi le program @ Aocally produced materials do not necessarily have less impact on the environment

/ro%ect <anagement? Climatic condition3

? 3

(+=

+= @=

@=

(7=

@=

(3.>=

/ro%ect <anagement is important to achieve economy and reduce construction "aste on site. 5n A;;D* under regional priority* ( to @ are allotted for regional priority to provide an incentive for the achievement of credits that address geographically$specific environmental priorities.

4. Discussion Aife cycle stages considered in BR;;-< are& design stage 'DS) $ leading to an interim BR;;-<
certified rating* and post$construction stage '/CS) J leading to a final BR;;-< certified rating. Curther* in BR;;-< there are t"o approaches to the assessment at the post$construction stage& a post$

construction revie" of an interim design$stage assessment and a post construction assessment. Rene"a ility is considered in all the rating systems and in the A;;D$NC* ( point is allotted if >= of the total value of uilding materials comes from rapidly rene"a le sources* defined as (2$year rotation or less. 5n the BR;;-<* @ credits for construction "aste management and ( credit for recycled aggregate is allotted. 5n Green star* > points for recycling "aste storage* recycled content and reuse of materials is allotted. 5n GR5.-* > points is reserved for re$ ne"a le energy utili0ation 'partly mandatory)* , points for re$ne"a le energy ased hot$ "ater system* + points for "aste "ater treatment* > points for "ater recycle and reuse 'including rain$"ater) and ? points for :tili0ation of fly$ash in uilding structure. 5n the BR;;-< it is mandatory to carry out programme for the endorsement of forest certification '/;CC)$ #ier level ,. 5n the A;;D* ( point is reserved if >2= or more of the "ood$ ased materials and products are CSC certified. 5n Green star* + points are given if Corest Ste"ardship Council 'CSC) certified tim er is used. #he BR;;-< reserves ( credit for materials "hich are transported from near y area. 5n Green Star* no credit is allotted for this. 5n the A;;D* one gets ( point if a minimum (2= of total uilding materials "ere e!tracted* processed and manufactured "ithin a >22 mile radiusI a second point for +2= minimum of total uilding materials. 5n the GR5.-* + points are allotted for minimum @2= usage of flyash ' y volume of materials used)* for (22= load earing and no load earing "alls. .ealth and safety of "or1er is e8ually important as of occupant "hich is not considered in the BR;;-<* A;;D and Green Star. But in the GR5.-* + points are allotted for at least* minimum level of sanitationGsafety facilities for construction "or1ers'<andatory criteria). #he BR;;-< rating system assigns (+= "eightage for pro%ect management aspect "hereas (7 points are given in Green Star and ?= "eightage is given in the GR5.-. 5. Conclusion
Green uilding is not a simple fusion of green design* techni8ues* and materials. 5t is a holistic solution to achieve the concept of sustaina le development in the pro%ect life cycle including pro%ect planning* designing* constructing* operating and demolishing. 5n this paper different rating systems that are used in developing countries li1e 5ndia* China and developed countries li1e the :S-* :K* Germany are compared and it is o served that life cycle assessment is not included in the Green Star and GB-S ut in the BR;;-<* it has een considered and (2 points are allotted for life cycle assessment of green uilding. 5n the conte!t of developing countries* economy is more important so it is necessary to consider life cycle cost of green uilding "hich is not ta1en into account in the
> ?

Hor1ers health and safety is very important to reduce accident on site.

GR5.-* the GB-S* and the A;;D. -ll rating system ho"ever considers rene"a ility. -s tim er is the most important material in uilding construction and cutting of "ood is harmful to environment* points should e given to "ood that comes from a sustaina le source and is certified through any credi le program. Corest certification is not considered in the GR5.- and the GB-S. #he authors elieve that* similar to end$user safety and health* construction "or1ers safety and health must e considered in green uilding. /ro%ect management is important to achieve economy and reduce construction "aste on site. 5n the BR;;-<* Green Star* Green Glo e* and the GR5.-* pro%ect management aspect is considered. 5n 5ndia* topography and climate changes from north to south and from east to "est. Cor such varied conditions* a rating system should also consider topographical and climatic factor.

6. References -dler* -.* -rmstrong* J. ;.* Culler* S. K.* Kalin* <.* Karolides* -.* <acaluso* J.* and Hal1er* .. -. '+22?) 0reen 1uilding2 3ro/ect planning and cost estimating K +nd ;d.* R.S. <eans* Kingston* <ass. Bauer <ichael* <osle /eter* Sch"ar0 <ichael '+2(2) L0reen )uilding 0uide1oo* for 4ustaina1le ArchitectureK Springer$Verlag Berlin .eidel erg '(e) pp (>$(9 Building Research ;sta lishment ;nvironmental -ssessment <ethod 'BR;;-< $+22?). Building Research ;sta lishment* Garston* Hatford* :.K.* (http255666-1reeam-org. Cassidy* R. '+22,) 7hite paper on sustaina1ilit"2 A report on the green 1uilding movement K Reed Business 5nformation* Building Design E Construction* Clear"ater* Cla Ding K.C. '+227) 4ustaina1le construction$ The role of environmental assessment tools Journal of ;nvironmental <anagement vol. 7? pp @>($@?@. DNGB Rating Standard '+223) Gam atese* J. -.* Ra%endran* S.* and Behm* <. G. '+22?) L)uilding to6ard sustaina1le safet" and health - /roc. -SS; /rofessional Development Conf.* -merican Society of Safety ;ngineers Seattle. Green Star rating standard '+2(() J multiunit residential v($ + July +229 updated (? Septem er. 5ntroduction to National Rating System '+2(2) L08I9A, An evaluation tool to help design, 1uild, operate, and maintain a resource$efficient 1uilt environmentK <inistry of Ne" and Rene"a le ;nergy* Government of 5ndia and #he ;nergy and Resources 5nstitute Ne" GR5.- <anual* Vol. ( pp ($@+ John -* '(99+) The source1oo* for sustaina1le design2 A guide to environmentall" responsi1le 1uilding materials and processes -rchitects for Social Responsi ility* Boston. A;;D$NC '+2(() LIndia 0reen )uilding Manual from Indian 0reen )uilding Council Rees* H. ;. '(979) 3lanning for sustaina1le development2 A resource 1oo*, :BC Centre for .uman Settlements* B.C.* Canada. Sathyanarayanan Ra%endran Gam atese J. -.* and Behm <. G.* '+229) LImpact of 0reen )uilding Design and Construction on 7or*er 4afet" and 9ealth Journal of Construction ;ngineering and <anagement.-SC; (,>* pp (2>7$(2?? Vol. (2 '(2>7) :g"u 4.4.* #.C. .aupt '+223) :e" performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustaina1ilit" $ a 4outh African construction industr" perspective Building and ;nvironment vol. @+ pp ??>J?72