PJH UiTM Proceeding

Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and Greetings to all, Putrajaya was designed as a sustainable development even in its inception stage
to echo Malaysias commitment to the global clarion call for sustainable development. The Government, in the RMK 10 is carrying through this commitment and has highlighted the need for property and infrastructure development in the country to move towards sustainable development by ensuring a more eco-friendly environment. In line with the call, Putrajaya Holdings (PJH) as the master developer of Putrajaya and a responsible corporate citizen aspires to be the catalyst for establishing Sustainable Green Development as the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) platform for the property industry. Throughout the 15 years of development of Putrajaya, PJH has been invited to be one of the keynote speakers for various conferences, locally and internationally to share its experience in developing this well planned and beautiful city. It is now the time for us to showcase our experience and take the lead in the sharing of knowledge on sustainable green development. With this intent, PJH in collaboration with the Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying (FSPU) of Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) are organising a symposium on Putrajaya: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development. I am most delighted to offer a warm welcome to all delegates, speakers and participants to this symposium. The symposium aims to create awareness and share with the relevant industry players such as contractors, consultants as well as Government departments and agencies on the importance and benefits of incorporating green elements with technology into property and infrastructure design, starting from the inception, construction, completion and maintenance of buildings/properties. PJH is honoured that YB Dato Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin, Minister, Federal Territories and Urban Well-being has graciously agreed to officiate this symposium. I wish to thank all those who have helped organised this symposium and to all the speakers who will be presenting their papers. To all participants, thank you for your participation and taking time off from your busy schedule to attend this symposium. I hope you will find the symposium interesting and beneficial. Y Bhg Datuk Azlan Abdul Karim Chief Executive Officer, Putrajaya Holdings
Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and warmest greetings, I must congratulate the professional personnel of Putrajaya Holdings and Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) who lead the role in organising a symposium on Putrajaya: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development. This symposium embarks on the vitality of giving a kick-start to synergise between academia and industrial players; particularly in the field of Built Environment. I am proud that UiTM is able to associate with a renowned corporation; Putrajaya Holding in running this symposium and ultimately to drive the Malaysian Governments initiatives in promoting green technology and sustainable built environment. On behalf of UiTM, I am honoured to convey our deepest gratitude for entrusting us to collaborate in organising this prestigious symposium. UiTM is a global, unique, and competitive university providing high-quality education and research. It has reached a maturity of an institution of higher learning and leadership beyond the boundaries of the university. With these qualities, I can assure that the collaboration is able to synergise excellently by guaranteeing green transformation inputs in catering to the demand from the industrial personnel. As I zoom into the vitality of the green agenda evolvement in the country, it is perceivable that collaboration between university and industry is extremely needed to achieve the government aspiration. Looking ahead, I envision that demand for green technology in Malaysia will grow tremendously as environmental awareness grows. The move towards sustainability in the Malaysian built environment sector is anticipated to usher in a more challenging future environment for existing players of built environment. This would ensure the sector to remain viable amidst a potentially large supply and embrace advanced and greener technologies in the years ahead. A rigorous approach to establish trust and positioning collaboration positively would enable the industry to reap the full benefits of our globalised and high technology environment. It has been a profound honour to be part of the team in realising the success of the symposium. We hope that the essences that we share could inject evolution of green-conscious built environment players that drive the aspiration of the government towards a sustainable green development. Thank you. Dato Prof.Ir Dr Sahol Hamid Abu Bakar, FASc Vice Chancellor, UniversitiTeknologi MARA (UiTM)
ii
Table of Contents
SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT: GREEN DESIGN, ARCHITECTURE, AND MATERIALS
Ar. Serina Hijjas
Overview
SUSTAINABLE GREEN BUILDING AND INTEGRATED GREEN PROJECT: Green Design and Planning
Dato Dr. Kenneth Yeang
1.0 Introduction 2.0 Four Strands of Eco-infrastructures 2.1 The Green Eco-infrastructure 2.2 The Grey Eco-infrastructure 2.3 The Blue Eco-infrastructure 2.4 The Red (or Human) Eco-infrastructure 3.0 Seamless & Benign Biointegration 4.0 Ecomimesis 5.0 Ecodesign as Restoring Impaired Environments 6.0 Ecodesign as a Self-monitoring System 7.0 Conclusion 8.0 References Overview
2 3 4 5 6 7
GREEN CONSTRUCTION AND INNOVATION: METHOD, TECHNIQUES, AND RESOURCES

Poul Erik Kristensen
CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY AND INVESTMENT ON GREEN DEVELOPMENT

Professor Charles Egbu
1.0 Introduction 2.0 Drivers, Challenges and Corporate Sustainability and Green Developments 3.0 Investment in Green Developments 4.0 A 12 - Point Strategic Framework for Effective Consideration and Implementation of Corporate Sustainability and Investment on Green Development 4. Conclusions and Recommendations 5.0 References 1.0 Introduction 2.0 The Green Initiatives Development in Malaysia - The Economical Value and Its Potential 3.0 The Green Building Index pilot project- Case study on Green Energy Office 3.1 GBI Certification Guarantees Government Incentives 3.2 GBI certified of GEO Building- EE and RE Integrated Value, Economical Value, and Potentials 4.0 Energy Efficiency and Energy Conservation buildingCase study on Low Energy Office 4.1 LEO building- EE Economical Value and Potentials 5.0 Clean Development Mechanism- Case study on Malaysian Carbon Credit Trading 5.1 Carbon Credit on CDM Energy Business-economical Value and Potentials 6.0 Feed-In tariff- Malaysia Review 7.0 The Conceptual Venture of Integrated Green Development Project 7.1 The Building Composition, Projects Economical Value, and Projects Feasible outcome 8.0 Conclusion 9.0 Acknowledgements 10.0 References 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Evolution of FM in Malaysia 3.0 Sustainable Facility Management 4.0 Relationship between FM and Green Building 5.0 Critical Success Factor 6.0 The Author 7.0 References
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19
Mariati Bagdad1, Assoc Professor Sr. Dr. Mohammad Fadhil Mohammad1 and Ungku Nur Sabrina Ungku Abdul Nassir1
GREEN INITIATIVES VENTURE OF INTEGRATED GREEN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
20
21
22
FACILITY MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTION IN GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVES

Mohammad Shahrizal Mohammad Idris
25 26 27 30 31 32
PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development PjH-UiTM Collaboration 2011 Novemeber 15, 2011, Putrajaya W.P., Malaysia
Ar. Serina Hijjas Hijjas Kasturi Associates Sdn Bhd, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (E-mail: Serina@hijjaskasturi.com)
SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT: GREEN DESIGN, ARCHITECTURE AND MATERIALS
Overview A strong emphasis of sustainable by planning and design upon improving the sustainability of the built environment. This aspect is crucial to grow the public awareness and the understanding of the importance of sustainable development practices; through, green design concept, material aspects (types, cost, and availability), thus green architecture composition in an urban development which is expected to enhance the quality of life for today and future generation. The aim of the paper is to discover fresh and holistic approaches to designing the sustainable built environment addressing building and the entire spatial environment. New ideas along with the regulatory practices, indicators, measurements, and priorities are significant to be viewed from the individual buildings to the district and city-scale level.

Dato Dr. Kenneth Yeang TR Hamzah & Yeang Sdn Bhd, Ampang, Selangor, Malaysia (E-mail: trhy@trhamzahyeang.com)
SUSTAINABLE GREEN BUILDING AND INTEGRATED GREEN PROJECT: Green Design and Planning
Abstract We are all only too aware of the numerous pressing global social issues that need to be addressed. These include issues such as addressing abject poverty, providing clean water, adequate food and enclosures, proper sanitation, and so forth. But ultimately if we do not have clean environment such as clean air, clean water, and clean land, all those other pressing global social issues become even more difficult and costly to resolve. Thus saving our environment has to be the most vital issue that humankind must address today, feeding into our fears that this millennium may be our last. For the designer, the compelling question is: how do we design for a sustainable future? Globally, businesses and industries face similar concerns of seeking to understand the environmental consequences of their functions and processes, to envision what these might be if they were sustainable, and to take action to realize this vision with comprehensive ecologically-benign strategies, with new business models, new production systems, materials and processes. More than these, our human society has to change to a sustainable way of life, we need to change how we live, behave, work, make, eat, learn, move about. Keywords Sustainability, Green, Design, Planning. 1.0 Introduction We would be mistaken to regard green design as simply just about eco-engineering. These engineering systems are indeed an important part of green design (see grey eco- infrastructure below) giving us an acceptable level of comfort that are sustainable, while such technologies continue to rapidly develop and advance towards a greener and cleaner engineering solutions for our built environment. However it must be clear that eco-engineering is not exclusively the only considerations in green design. Neither is green design just about the rating systems (such as LEED, BREEAM, Carbon profiling, etc.). These are certainly useful checklists and guidelines but are not comprehensive. They are useful as a partial tick list of reminders of some of the key items to consider in green design or for comparing buildings and master plans using a common standard. They have also been useful in proselytizing green design to a wider audience. But by not being comprehensive and ecologically holistic (an aspect crucial in eco-design), many designers having achieved the highest level of rating (such as platinum) would ask what next? Where do we go from here?
2
Clearly, green design has now entered the mainstream of architecture. Ask any architect today about green design and you will find the same pitch use of renewable energy systems (such as photovoltaics, wind generators, etc.), compliance to accreditation systems, carbon profiling, planning as new urbanism, etc. We need to question whether this is all there is to green design? The contention here is that achieving effective green design is much more than the above and that green design is not as easy as it had been contended. It is complex. While still incomplete, there are a number of design strategies that can be adopted in combination to arrive as close as we could to the goal of achieving a state of stasis of our built environment with the natural environment. 2.0 Four Strands of Eco-infrastructures The first design strategy is to view green design in terms of weaving of four strands of eco-infrastructures, colour coded here as follows: The grey (the engineering infrastructure being the eco sustainable clean tech engineering systems and utilities). The blue (water management and closing of the water cycle by design with sustainable drainage). The green (the green eco-infrastructure or natures own utilities which must be linked). The red (our human built systems, spaces, hard capes, society, legislative and regulatory systems). Green design is the seamless and the benign blending of all these four sets of eco-infrastructures into a system. This concept provides a platform for green design. Like the factors in DNA (by Crick and Watson) which reduces a complex concept into fours simple sets of instructions, these four sets of eco-infrastructures and their integration provide the integrative bases for green design and planning - the blending of all these four sets of infrastructures into a system. 2.1 The Green Eco-infrastructure The green eco-infrastructure is vital to every design and master plan. It parallels the usual grey urban infrastructure of roads, drainage systems and utilities. This green eco- infrastructure is natures utilities. These is the interconnected network of natural areas and other open green spaces within the biome that conserves natural ecosystem values and clean air and water. It also enables the area to flourish as a natural habitat for a wide range of wildlife besides delivering a wide array of benefits to humans and the natural world alike, such as providing habitats linked across the landscape that permits fauna (such as birds and animals) to move freely. This eco-infrastructure is natures functioning infrastructure (equivalent to our human-made engineering infrastructures, designated here as grey, blue and red eco-infrastructures), and in addition to providing cleaner water and enhancing water supplies, it can also result in some, if not all, of the following outcomes: cleaner air; a reduction in heat-island effect in urban areas; a moderation in the impact of climate change; increased energy efficiency; and the protection of source water. Incorporating an eco-infrastructure is thus vital to any eco-master planning endeavour. Without it, no matter how clever or advanced are the eco-engineering systems, the design or master plan remains simply a work of engineering, and can in no way be called an ecological master plan nor neither in the case of larger developments, an eco-city. These linear-flora and fauna corridors connect existing green spaces and larger green areas within the locality and to the landscape of the hinterland, and can create new larger habitats in their own right, or may be in the form of newly linked existing woodland belts or wetlands, or existing landscape features (such as overgrown railway lines, hedges and waterways). Any new green infrastructure must clearly also complement and enhance the natural functions of what is already there in the landscape. In the master planning process, the designer identifies existing green corridors, routes and green areas, and possible new routes and linkages for creating new connections in the landscape. It is at this point that additional green functional landscape elements or zones can also be integrated, such as linking to existing waterways that also provide ecological services, such as drainage to attenuate flooding.
3
This eco-infrastructure takes precedence over the engineering eco-infrastructure in the master plan. By creating, improving and rehabilitating ecological connectivity of the immediate environment, the eco-infrastructure turns human intervention in the landscape from a negative into a positive. Its environmental benefits and values are as a green armature and framework for natural systems and functions that are ecologically fundamental to the viability of the localitys plant and animal species and their habitats, such as healthy soils, water and air. It reverses the fragmentation of natural habitats (as a consequence of urban sprawl and transportation routes, etc.) and encourages increases in biodiversity to restore functioning ecosystems while providing the fabric for sustainable living, and safeguarding and enhancing natural features. This endeavour by design to connect the landscape must extend to the built form is both horizontally and a vertically. An obvious demonstration of horizontal connectivity is the provision of ecological corridors and links in regional and local planning that are crucial for making urban patterns more biologically viable. Connectivity over impervious surfaces and roads can be achieved by using ecological bridges, under crofts and ramps. Besides improved horizontal connectivity and ecological nexus, vertical connectivity with buildings is also necessary since most buildings are not single storey but multi-storey. Design must extend the ecological corridors vertically upwards, with the eco-infrastructure traversing a building from the foundations and landscape at the ground to create habitats on the walls, terraces and rooftops. 2.2 The Grey Eco-infrastructure The grey infrastructure is the usual urban engineering infrastructure such as roads, drains, sewerage, water reticulation, telecommunications, and energy and electric power distribution systems. We need not to be prescriptive of any specific engineering system, but require that these systems be clean technologies, of low embodied energy and be carbon neutral inasmuch as possible, and at the same time be integral with the green infrastructure rather than vice-versa. 2.3 The Blue Eco-infrastructure Parallel to the ecological infrastructure is the water infrastructure (the blue eco-infrastructure) where the water cycle should be managed to close the loop, although not always possible in locations with low rainfall. Rainfall needs to be harvested and water use to be recycled. The surface water from rain needs to be retained within the site and to be returned back to the land for the recharging of groundwater and aquifers by means of filtration beds, pervious roadways and built surfaces, retention ponds and bio swales. Water used within the built environment (both grey and black water) need to be reused sustainably inasmuch as possible. Site planning must take into consideration the sites natural drainage patterns and provide surface-water management such that rainfall remains within the locality and is not drained away into water bodies which is then lost. Combined with the green eco-infrastructure, storm water management enables the natural processes to infiltrate, evapotranspire, or the capture and use storm water on or near the site where it falls while potentially generating other environmental benefits. Waterways should not be culverted or deculverted as engineered waterways, but should be replaced with the introduction of wetlands and buffer strips of ecologically functional meadows and woodland habitats. Sealed surfaces can reduce soil moisture and leave low- lying areas susceptible to flooding from excessive run-off. Wetland greenways need to be designed as sustainable drainage systems to provide ecological services. Green buffers can be used together with linear green spaces to maximize their habitat potential. Eco-design must create sustainable urban drainage systems that can function as wetland habitats. This is not only to alleviate flooding, but also to create buffer strips for habitat creation. While the widths of the buffer may be constrained by existing land uses, their integration through linear green spaces can allow for wider corridors. Surface-water management maximises habitat potential. Intermittent waterway tributaries can be linked up using swales.
4
2.4 The Red (or Human) Eco-infrastructure This human eco-infrastructure is our human community, its built enclosures (buildings, houses etc), hard scapes and regulatory systems (laws, regulations, legislation, ethics etc). This is the social and human dimension that is often missing in the work of many green designers. It is evidently clear that our present profligate lifestyles, our economies and industries, our mobility, our diet and food production, etc., need to be changed to be sustainable. 3.0 Seamless & Benign Biointegration The second design strategy is to regard green design as Biointegration - as the seamless and benign environmental Biointegration of the synthetic and the artificial (the human made) with the natural environment. It is the failure to successfully biointegrate that is the root cause of all our environmental problems. In effect if we are able to biointegrate all our business and industrial processes and functions, all our built systems and essentially everything that we do or make in our built environment (which by definition includes our buildings, facilities, infrastructure, products, refrigerators, toys, etc.) with the natural environment in a seamless and benign way, there will in principle be no environmental problems whatsoever. Successfully achieving this is of course easier said than done, but herein lies our challenge. We can draw an analogy here between eco-design and prosthetic design in surgery. A medical prosthetic has to integrate with its organic host being the human body. Failure to integrate successfully results in dislocation in one or in both. By analogy, this is what ecodesign should achieve: a total physical, systemic and temporal integration of our human- made built environment and our activities with our organic host being the natural environment within in a benign and positive way. Eco-design is thus design that successfully biointegrates our artificial systems both mechanically and organically, with its host system being the ecosystems in the biosphere. Our designing for bio-integration can be regarded at three aspects: physically, systemically and temporally. Physical and systemic integration requires a discernment of the ecology of the locality. Any activity arising from our design or our business/industries must physically integrate benignly with the ecosystems. To achieve this, we must first understand the localitys ecosystem before imposing any human activity or built system upon it. Every site has ecology with a limiting capacity to withstand stresses imposed upon it, which if stressed beyond this capacity, becomes irrevocably damaged. Consequences can range from minimal localised impact (such as the clearing of a small land area for access), to the total devastation of the entire land area (such as the clearing of all trees and vegetation, levelling the topography, diversion of existing waterways, etc). We need to ascertain the localitys ecosystem structure, energy flow, its species diversity and other ecological properties and processes. Then we must identify which parts of the site (if any) can permit different types of structures and activities, and which parts are particularly sensitive. Finally, we must consider the likely impacts of the intended construction and use over time. This is of course a major undertaking. It needs to be done diurnally over the year and in some instances over several years. To reduce this lengthy effort, landscape architects developed the sieve-mapping technique for landscaping mapping. We must be aware that this method is an abbreviated approach, and generally treats the sites ecosystem statically and may ignore the dynamic forces taking place between the layers and within an ecosystem. Between each of these layers are complex interactions. Another major design issue is the systemic integration of our built forms and its operational systems and internal processes with the ecosystems in nature. This integration is crucial because if our built systems and processes do not integrate with the natural systems in nature, then they will remain disparate, artificial items and potentially pollutive and destructive to the ecology of the locality. Their eventual integration after their manufacture and use can only be through biodegradation. Often, this requires a long-term natural process of decomposition.
Temporal integration involves the conservation of both renewable and non-renewable resources to ensure that these are sustainable for future generations. This includes designing for low energy built systems that are less or are non dependant on the use of non-renewable energy resources. 4.0 Ecomimesis The third design strategy is to regard green design as ecomimesis as imitating the attribute and properties of ecosystems their processes, structure, features and functions. This is one of the fundamental premises for eco-design. Our built environment must imitate ecosystems in all respects e.g. recycling, using energy from the sun through photosynthesis, become systems that head towards increasing energy efficiency, achieve a holistic balance of biotic and abiotic constituents, etc. Nature without humans exists in stasis. Can our businesses and our built environment imitate natures processes, structure, and functions, particularly its ecosystems? For instance, ecosystems have no waste. Everything is recycled within. Thus by imitating this, our built environment will produce no waste. All emissions and products are continuously reused, recycled within and eventually reintegrated with the natural environment, in tandem with efficient uses of energy and material resources. Ecosystems in a biosphere are definable units containing both biotic and abiotic constituents acting together as a whole. From this concept, our businesses/industries and built environment should be designed analogously to the ecosystems physical content, composition and processes. For instance, besides regarding our architecture as just art objects or as engineering-serviced enclosures, we should regard it as artefacts that need to be operationally and eventually integrated with nature. As is self-evident, the material composition of our built environment is almost entirely inorganic, whereas ecosystems contain a complement of both biotic and abiotic constituents, or of inorganic and organic components, which need to be reversed. Our myriad of construction, manufacturing and other activities are, in effect, making the biosphere more and more inorganic, artificial and increasingly biologically simplified. To continue without balancing the biotic content means simply adding to the biospheres artificiality, thereby making it increasingly more and more inorganic and synthetic. This results in the biological simplification of the biosphere and the reduction of its complexity and diversity. We must reverse this trend and balance our built environment with greater integral levels of biomass, ameliorating biodiversity and ecological connectivity in the built forms. Ecodesign also requires the designer to use green materials and assemblies of materials, and components that facilitate reuse, recycling and reintegration for temporal integration with the ecological systems. We need to be ecomimetic in our use of materials in the built environment. In ecosystems, all living organisms feed on continual flows of matter and energy from their environment to stay alive, and all living organisms continually produce outputs. Here, an ecosystem generates no waste, one species waste being another species food. Thus matter cycles continually through the web of life. It is this closing of the loop in reuse and recycling that our human-made environment must imitate. 5.0 Ecodesign as Restoring Impaired Environments Fourthly, ecodesign can be regarded not only as the creating of new artificial living urban ecosystems or rehabilitating existing built environments and cities, but also as one of restoring existent impaired and devastated ecosystems regionally within the wider landscape to our designed system. Ecodesign must look beyond the limitations of the project site, and at the larger context of the locality. Where needed we should improve the ecological linkages between our designed systems and our business processes with the surrounding landscape and hardscapes, not just horizontally but also vertically. Achieving these linkages ensures a wider level of species connectivity, interaction, mobility and greater sharing of resources across boundaries. Such real improvements in ecological nexus enhance biodiversity and further increase habitat resilience and species survival. Providing new ecological corridors and linkages in regional planning is crucial in making urban patterns more biologically viable.
6
Crucially we need to apply these concepts to retrofit our existent cites and urban developments. We must biointegrate the existent inorganic aspects of our built environment and its processes with the landscape so that they mutually become ecosystemic. We must create human-made ecosystems compatible with the ecosystems in nature. By doing so, we enhance human-made ecosystems abilities to sustain life in the biosphere. 6.0 Ecodesign as a Self-monitoring System The fifth strategy for ecodesign is to regard our designed system as a series of interdependent environmental interactions, whose constant global and local monitoring (e.g. through GPS and biosensors, etc.) is necessary to ensure global environmental stasis, enabling an anticipatory approach to and the immediate repair and restoration of environmental devastations by humans, natural disasters and the inadvertent negative impacts of our human built environment, activities and industries. These sets of environmental interactions need to be monitored for appropriate corrective action to be immediately taken to maintain global ecological stability. 7.0 Conclusion The above are strategies that can be adopted singularly or in composite to approach green design. Green design has to goes beyond conventional rating systems such as LEED or BREEAM, etc. While being indeed useful indexes for providing a common basis for comparing the greenness of building designs, they are however not totally effective design tools. They are not comprehensive enough in approaching the issues of environmental design at the local, regional and global levels. Generally stated, ecological design is still very much in its infancy. The totally green building or green ecocity does not yet exist. There is still much more theoretical work, technical research and invention, environmental studies and design interpretation that need to be done and tested before we can have a truly green built environment. We all need to continue this great pursuit. 8.0 References Yeang K. 2009, EcoMasterplanning: Ken Yeang, John Wiley & Sons (UK). Yeang K. 2009, Eco Skyscrapers, Images Publishing Group (Australia). Yeang K. 2006, EcoDesign: A Manual for Ecological Design, John Wiley & Sons (UK). Ken Yeang, DMPN, PhD (Cantab.), AA Dipl., D.Lit. (Hon.), FRSA, APAM, FSIA, RIBA, ARAIA, Hon. FAIA, Hon. FRIAS, Chairman of Llewelyn Davies Yeang (UK) and its sister company, T. R. Hamzah & Yeang (Malaysia), Distinguished Plym Professor University of Illinois, Adjunct Professor at the University of Malaya, University of Hawaii at Manoa, University of Tongji (Shanghai).

Poul Erik Kristensen IEN Consultants Sdn. Bhd, Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (E-mail: poul @ ien.com.my)
GREEN CONSTRUCTION AND INNOVATION: METHOD, TECHNIQUES AND RESOURCES

Overview The ideal green project and integrated green elements is focusing on energy sustainability. Somehow or rather, this would preserve the public decision to build a green building as well as opt for green features in order to maximize the green potential, minimize redesign, and assure the overall success and economic viability of the green elements of the building project. The aim of the paper, nevertheless, is to propose various green choices that the stakeholders could afford to decide on; which is consequently potential to be integrated to the built environment. Further, these Integrated Green Developments must be holistically planned and designed following the Green Building Standard practices but with adaptation to the Socio-Economic Conditions.

Professor Charles Egbu School of the Built Environment, University of Salford, England, UK (E-mail:c.o.egbu@ac.uk)
CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY AND INVESTMENT ON GREEN DEVELOPMENT

Abstract In this second decade of the twenty-first century, key stakeholders in the marketplace are demanding that organisations demonstrate their ability to improve corporate processes and dayby-day operations, be socially responsible, environmentally sustainable and economically viable. This implies that if organisations want to obtain their stakeholders trust and build a good reputation in the market place, organisations would need to provide concrete evidence that they are committed to continual long-term improvement; identifying, monitoring, and reporting all social, environmental, and economic effects of their operations. Reporting on sustainability-related initiatives and their performances should be seen as an integral part of business operations of most organisations. The level of implementation of corporate sustainability-related activities and performance reporting in the annual sustainability-related reports, however, is still in its infancy. However, some organisations are making reasonable efforts to disclose information about their sustainability-related activities and performance in their published annual sustainability- related reports. This includes reporting on employee well-being activities and performance, waste reduction activities and performance, resources efficiency activities and performance, corporate social responsibility activities and performance. Reporting on carbon emissions reduction activities and performance still appears the least reported initiative. This paper argues that the practice of corporate sustainability is not easy, but it is here to stay, and it provides an opportunity for organisational innovations and competitive advantage. The paper posits a strategic framework for considering effective corporate sustainability and investment on green development. Corporate sustainability should not be seen as a capital outlay but an investment. It should also be seen as a long-term investment demanding a holistic approach in its consideration and implementation. There is ample scope for organisational improvements in strategic and operational consideration of corporate sustainability as well as in investment in this regard. Keywords Carbon Emission Reduction, Corporate Sustainability, Green Development and Investment
1.0 Introduction Few would argue that todays business environments in which organisations operate are different from those of ten or twenty years ago. These are partly due to the need to meet increased demands and expectations of stakeholders; protecting degradation of natural resources; working within the confines of a knowledge economy; managing crisis and remediation while defending the organisation; and diminishing social and community structures. These are very complex issues, involving numerous processes carried out and influenced by many stakeholders; and they colour and guide corporate level decisions. They are also formidable environmental, economic and social issues that have evolved over time and which need urgent attention. While these raise real challenges to organisations, they also provide some opportunities. From a business perspective, sustainability could be seen as an opportunity for creating longterm shareholder value by seizing opportunities and managing risks related to the economic, environmental, and social impact of doing business. The World Commission on Environment and Development has defined sustainability as economic development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Brundtland, 1987). However, this macroeconomic definition, arguably, does not provide much guidance on how this concept should be put into operation at a corporate level; and managers still question how to implement a strategy to encourage corporate sustainability when there are many competing organisational constraints and numerous barriers to implement. There have been many initiatives put in place, at international, national and local levels in many countries with regard to sustainability. These include the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change talks in Cancun, Mexico in 2010, where major efforts were made to win progress on international agreements necessary for further adoption of sustainability practices. The 17th conference of parties (COP 17) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is planned to be held in Durban, South Africa, between 28th November and 9th December 2011. Sustainability has significant implications for all businesses. In particularly, it necessitates a decision making process that balances the impacts associated with environmental, social and economic issues. In order for this to occur, however, the principles of sustainability must be incorporated into existing corporate strategy and management systems, rather than being seen as just another addon. For it to be meaningful, sustainability must therefore be viewed as an essential business value that requires full integration into core business strategies. Although there is no one best theory, best acclaimed or definitive approach as to how organisations can integrate sustainability issues and imperatives into their overall organisational structure, it is nonetheless important that sustainability issues need to be linked to the continual improvement of business performance and in line with the vagaries of organisational characteristics, strategic intent and trajectory and pathways. 2.0 Drivers, Challenges and Corporate Sustainability and Green Developments Green development has been receiving increased attention for many years now, especially in the last two decades. Many reasons can be proffered for this, such as the rising oil prices, legislation and regulations, and phenomenon like global warming seen to be affecting us. There is, however, a definitional issue here as well an issue of scope with regard to green development. The definition of green is quite wide, and covers such issues as sustainability, environment, energy, and waste minimization to mention but a few. With initiatives like the Kyoto Protocol, ISO 14000 and carbon credit system the adaptation of the green philosophy is being regulated and incentivised. Arif et al (2009) have argued that the major drivers behind the adoption of green are regulations, cost savings through reduction in energy costs and waste minimization, promotion of corporate green image and corporate social responsibility. Although the issue of green is in the fore, regulatory bodies, private corporations, government agencies and final consumers view green from different perspectives and use different sets of variables to choose the path of going green. To improve sustainability performance, executives have recognised that it is necessary to better understand the drivers of both costs and revenues and the actions that they can take to affect them. The identification and measurement of social and environmental strategies are; however, particularly difficult as they are
10
usually linked to longterm time horizons, a high level of uncertainty, and impacts that are often difficult to quantify. Nonetheless, it is important for businesses to understand the reasons why they need to adopt the sustainability initiatives. Firstly, this understanding could help business leaders to identify the resulting sustainabilityrelated drivers in their industry and organisations. Secondly, this understanding could act as a muchneeded catalyst for stimulating internal discussions and debate about sustainability threats and opportunities in the market place and in the society. Thirdly, this understanding could assist decision makers to develop sustainability strategy based on the drivers. Fourthly, this understanding could expose the mechanisms that foster sustainable organisations, allowing managers and decision makers to determine the relative efficacy of actions, market and measures. In this paper, a broader definition of green development is considered, and not limited only to practices and techniques that are environmentally friendly, energy efficient and minimisation of waste. A thorough review of extant literature reveals articles addressing related areas of green developments, including Ofori (1998, 2000), Revell and Blackburn (2007), and Pasquire (1999) that have presented a range of success factors that can help make construction industry environmentally friendly such as: imposition of stricter regulations, establishment of longer customer-supplier relationship; increased awareness of environmental, social and economic impact; implementation of environmental management system; support and push from top management; implementation of ISO14000 certifications; regular audits on green environmental standards; customers willingness to pay extra for green construction and engagement by government bodies during the formulation of the regulations. Arif et al (2009) and Potbhare (2009) have also noted that there are other writers who have proffered suggestions for waste minimisation, an important aspect of green development. These include Dainty and Brooke (2004), and Sarkis (1998). Suggestions for improved waste minimisation include standardization of design; stock control to minimize over-ordering; environmental education for the workforce; having recycling and waste disposal companies as part of the supply chain; practicing just-in-time delivery approaches; penalties for poor waste management; incentives and tender premiums for waste minimisation; waste auditing; increased use of off-site techniques; use of on-site compactors; suppliers required to provide materials and products in small batch sizes; and reverse logistics. In the same vein, Bartlett and Howard (2000), Tiwari (2001), Sarkis (1998), and Unruh (2008) have highlighted issues and practices associated with addressing energy efficiency, especially with respect to the construction and building projects and developments. These are: setting up energy saving objectives at operational levels; consideration of energy objectives at the strategic planning level; value management of energy plans; lifecycle costing accuracy; improved education/awareness of designers about energy efficient materials and techniques; use of cost and environmental assessment tools; and investigation about energy producing opportunities in construction development projects. Dealing with corporate sustainability is not easy and not without its challenge. Industry barriers and challenges to corporate sustainability are worthy of consideration, which reflect the special and unique features of the business activity in which organisations engage. Industry barriers include technical information and knowledge, capital costs, configuration of current operations, competitive pressures and industry regulations. Industry barriers represent a first wave of obstacles for organisations to overcome in improving sustainability performance. Organisations in the chemical, electric utility, construction, steel, mining and pulp and paper industries face the toughest challenges in overhauling operations to promote sustainability (Post and Altman, 1994). Translating a sustainability strategy into action and driving it through a complex organisation is a substantial challenge. Without appropriate organisational structure and management systems, organisations may not reap all the benefits associated with sustainability performance. The alignments of strategy, structure, and management systems are essential for organisations to both coordinate activities and motivate employees toward implementing a sustainability strategy. The organisational structure around sustainability issues is critical to success and entails organising a wide range of activities and resources often spread throughout many locations. Organisations must consider whether key resources and activities should be centralised or decentralised, and decide upon a level of central control versus business unit autonomy. These decisions must be appropriately aligned with organisational culture. It is difficult to achieve maximum sustainability performance unless management sends a clear message that sustainability performance is critical to the company. If employee performance is evaluated based solely on short-term profit or revenue contributions, employees quickly recognize that trade-offs on the social and environmental issues are acceptable and desired changes in corporate culture become more difficult (Epstein and Roy, 2001).
11
3.0 Investment in Green Developments As discussed previously, green developments and initiatives are now being given increased attention by nations and corporate institutions, and these take different formats and approaches. Many countries are also increasingly developing initiatives for a low carbon economy. The need for investment in green developments is important and complex. Green growth, for many, could be seen as an important mechanism for promoting economic growth while reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, minimising waste and inefficient use of natural resources, and maintaining biodiversity. It could equally be interpreted to mean the improvement of health and welfare prospects for communities and strengthening energy security through less dependence on imported fossil fuels. Green growth will, undoubtedly, necessitate a paradigm shift in both public and private investments. In addition, given the current world-wide financial challenges and limited public funds, there is need for appropriate policy frameworks to help leverage private financing for green developments and initiatives. As an example, in the UK, the current coalition government is creating the UK Green Investment Bank, which will begin operating in April 2012. Most countries have a development bank, but the UK will be the first country to have a national bank dedicated to the green economy. Some of the banks early targets would be offshore wind, waste and non-domestic energy efficiency. It is anticipated that this will give businesses the reassurance they are looking for to invest in British renewable energy jobs and industries. The green investment bank could be used to cut energy waste from homes and in so doing, help to tackle fuel poverty and climate-changing emissions. It is generally well documented that in many western economies, the recent financial crisis and turmoil in the credit markets, mean that many commercial lenders who are active in the renewable energy sector are now seemingly unwilling to be forth coming or take the lead in major financings. There is, however, need for countries, including the Malaysian Government and corporate institutions to increasingly invest and finance green services, products and technologies. In Malaysia, for example, there is need for increased and improved access to finance for businesses providing clean energy and climate resilient technologies. There are benefits for Malaysia to continuously move to a cleaner energy economy, reduce dependency on fossil fuels and biomass. Similarly, a move towards improved preservation and conservation of land health and beneficial impacts of renewable energy development on wild life and habitats is welcome. In terms of financial investment, there is ample role for commercial banks and microfinance institutions to increase lending to households and rural small and medium enterprises in Malaysia. Governments should encourage procurement practices, including public private initiatives where these are appropriate, in the access and delivery of green investment. These could have wide and positive ramifications. They could offer advantages to bidders, supplies and contractors embracing green initiatives when developing a green projects; offer best value for money through lower running costs; improved adoption of green outputs which can help in stimulating and accelerating the take-up and adoption of green services, products and technologies. There is also increased role for private equity, venture capital and public markets in the financing of green developments, especially renewable energy programmes. Private equity funds could increasingly participate in the renewable energy market by taking an equity stake in, or buying out, promising renewable energy project developers or equipment manufacturers. Again, while it is the case that venture capital investors do not generally play a role in financing the construction of renewable energy assets, venture investors could fund promising renewable energy technologies in the initial stages of the commercialization process. In the same vein, public markets could increasingly offer indirect financing to renewable energy projects by channelling capital to renewable energy technology manufacturers and project developers. Although investments in research and development (R&D) by organisations in many industrial sectors are low, there is need for organisations to do better in investing in corporate sustainability initiatives. 4.0 A 12 - Point Strategic Framework for Effective Consideration and Implementation of Corporate Sustainability and Investment on Green Development The importance of sustainability for organisations and the challenges associated with its implementation means that organisations would have to give due consideration to this important and growing dimension of organisational life. There is also an urgent need to develop an appropriate strategic framework which
12
should allow organisations to consider and implement corporate sustainability in a holistic manner. A 12-point strategic framework is provided below, which when considered appropriately could be of help to organisations. These are not documented in any order of importance or sequence to be followed. Their relative importance is likely to vary from organisation to organisation and in accordance with the maturity level of an organisation. 1. Link corporate sustainability strategy to wider organisational strategy 2. Develop appropriate organisational cultures and climate that are rife for corporate sustainability 3. Conduct a corporate sustainability mapping exercise with risk management at its heart identifying gaps, strengths and weaknesses 4. Set clear and ambitious corporate sustainability targets and commit to this through demonstrable actions 5. Institute an organisational performance measurement regime of corporate sustainability 6. Obtain buy-in from organisational staff, draw on customer capital, and fully engage with stakeholders in the area of corporate sustainability 7. Develop expertise, core and dynamic capabilities; draw on lessons learned on corporate responsibility initiatives (processes, products, services and technologies) and exploit innovations in this regard. 8. Develop effective communication plans (for internal organisational and external audiences) around corporate sustainability. 9. Explore and exploit wider initiatives that benefit corporate sustainability 10. Invest (finance, time and human capital) in corporate sustainability, including in research and development (R&D) 11. Corporate sustainability initiative(s) could be done singly, more than one project at a time, serially or in parallel. But it needs to be carried out within the framework of organisational capability, resources, within accepted organisational pace and trajectory. 12. Report on corporate sustainability outcomes regularly, comprehensively and fairly; including reporting on corporate sustainability performance While a strategic framework is important in addressing corporate strategy, it is equally important that organisations are minded about the requisite resources (capabilities and capacities) at their disposal in effecting appropriate strategies. At the same time, there is a need for effective business cases to be made for corporate sustainability and green development initiatives. 4. Conclusions and Recommendations There is an increased level of attention and importance attached to corporate sustainability and green developments. Corporate sustainability is diverse and complex. It is about a proper balance being created between economic, social and ecological aims. Effectively managing sustainability could lead to the creation of new ways of working, new products, services, and new market space. Pursuing such an approach can offer organisations significant potential benefits, including the identification of new and untapped business opportunities, a greater focus on longer-term emerging customer needs, migration into business areas that, by definition, have greater longevity, and the ability to create a genuine win-win situation for both business and society. Corporate sustainability, therefore, provides an opportunity for organisational innovations. Organisations face real challenges in addressing the complex issues associated with corporate sustainability. Corporate sustainability should be seen as a long-term investment. A holistic approach is also needed in addressing corporate sustainability. A strategic framework is called for as part of a holistic approach. This calls, inter alia, for financial investment and organisational commitment. A strategy for corporate sustainability needs to be aligned to the wider organisational strategy.
13
5.0 References Arif, M; Egbu, C. and Alshawi, M (2010) Promoting Green Construction in India through IndustryAcademia Collaboration Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice. Volume 136, Issue 3, pp. 128-131 Issue Date: July 2010. Arif, M; Egbu, C; Halem, A.; Kulonda, D.; and Khalfan, M. (2009). State of Green Construction in India: Drivers and Challenges, Journal of Engineering Design and Technology, 2009, 7(2), 223-234. Highly Commended Award Winner at the Literati Network Awards for Excellence 2010. Bruntland, G. (1987). Our common future: The world commission on environment and development, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Dainty, A.R.J. and Brooke, R.J. (2004), Towards Improved Construction Waste Minimisation: A Need for Improved Supply Chain Integration? Structural Survey, 22(1), 20-29. Epstein, M. J. and Roy, M. J. (2001) Sustainability in Action: Identifying and Measuring the Key Performance Drivers. Long Range Planning, 34, 585-604. Ofori, G. (1998), Sustainable Construction: Principles and a Framework for Attainment comment, Construction Management and Economics, 16, 141-145. Ofori, G. (2000), Greening the Construction Supply Chain in Singapore, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 6, 195-206. Pasquire, C. (1999), The Implications of Environmental Issues on UK Construction Management, Engineering Construction and Architecture Management, 6(3), 276-286. Post, J. E. and Altman, B. W. (1994) Managing environmental change process: barriers and opportunities. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 7(4), 4-14. Potbhare, V., Syal, M., Arif, Mohammed, Khalfan, M., and Egbu, C., (2009) Emergence of Green Building Guidelines in India and their Comparison with Developed Countries, Journal of Engineering Design and Technology, 2009, 7(1), 99-121.Outstanding Paper Award Winner at the Literati Network Awards for Excellence 2010. Revell, A. and Blackburn, R. (2007), The business case for sustainability? An examination of small firms in the UKs construction and restaurant sectors, Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(6), 404-420. Sarkis, J.(1998), Evaluating Environmentally Conscious Business Practices, European Journal of Operations Research, 107 (2), 159-174. Syal, M. Hastak, M. Mullens, M. and Sweany, A. (2006), United StatesIndia Collaborative Research Directions in Urban Housing and Supporting Infrastructure, Journal of Architecture Engineering, December, 163-167. Tiwari, P. (2001), Energy Efficiency and Building Construction in India, Building and Environment, 36, 1127-1135. Unruh, G.C. (2008), The Biosphere Rules, Harvard Business Review, February, 111-116. Walton, S.V. Handfield, R.B. and Melnyk, S.A. (1998), The Green Supply Chain: Integrating Suppliers into Environmental Management Process, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Spring Issue, 1-10.
14

Mariati Bagdad1, Assoc Professor Sr. Dr. Mohammad Fadhil Mohammad1 and Ungku Nur Sabrina Ungku Abdul Nassir1 1 Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, MALAYSIA (E-mail: Mariati.bagdad@gmail.com, fadhilnavy@yahoo.com, unsabrina@hotmail.com)
GREEN INITIATIVES VENTURE OF INTEGRATED GREEN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Abstract The Copenhagen Climate Change Summit 2009 (COP15) has seen that Malaysia has pledged to reduce its emissions intensity of GDP by the year 2020. Therefore, the building sectors are also motivated to play a part to revolutionize the Malaysian property development. This green movement attempts to achieve sustainability goal towards a carbon neutral city in the coming millennia. Alternatively, there are other green initiatives likely to be opted with in reducing carbon emissions intensity yet promises a huge potential on business profit. Many scholars claimed that Green Building Index (GBI) offers a rating system tools that is promising positive outcomes to the certified green building and a pay-off to stakeholders. However, in the present Malaysia market, the development of green building is quite slowness due to the overwhelming debate on the economical value out of green features. Therefore, this paper shall be the introductory paper upon the study on green initiatives in Malaysia such as GBI, renewable energy and carbon credit venture. The objective of this paper is to present the case study analysis on certified green building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) model in Malaysia thus define its potential connection to the carbon credit project. Nevertheless, the aim of this paper is to provide a fundamental base on the simulation model in optimizing the sustainability value out of integrated green development project in Malaysia. This paper assesses the literature review and case study analysis on exchange-value and use-value of green initiatives approach thus attempts to hypothesize the feasibility of integrated green development project. The simulation model is expected to anticipate the Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015 aspirations towards the New Economic Model, premised on high income, inclusiveness and sustainability by building sensible green property along with other integrated green mechanisms. Keywords Green initiatives, GBI, Renewable energy, Carbon Credit, Sustainable Value 1.0 Introduction Malaysia today is facing two of the worlds most pressing issues, namely climate change and energy security which in due course causes an incretion to worlds carbon emissions (MPM, Warren, 2009; Dunphy et al., 2007 ). In facing up to the greenhouse gasses (GHGs) emission challenges, the Government and the Malaysian Construction Professionals are now very committed to contribute a sustainable approach; hence becoming the ultimate reasons of Going Green concept become a
15
government policy. This is evident when the Ministry of Energy, Green Technology, and Water (2009) comprehend the paces towards this Green vision thus announce the national green policy namely Green Technology. Apart from that, the ambitious Green Building Index Scheme (GBI) is introduced in 2009 to revolutionize the Malaysian property development, in spite of its attempts to achieve a carbon neutral city in the coming millennia (GBI, 2010; MPM, 2009; Khamidi, 2007). As a result, aiming at Green property development is a current trend among the building industry players. However, Malaysian Green Building Confederation (2010) realizes that buildings or built environment, those contributes significantly to green house gas emissions (GHGs) must integrate sustainable approach that consider the synergy among three sets of values namely Triple Bottom Line; including the natural, social, and economic environment. That is to say, the sustainable strategy of green building must enlighten the developers on good corporate business management principles to grow through a proper managed sustainability and green initiatives, as well as a positive growth to business development (Bertrand, 2010). According to Bagdad (2011) study, the issues on green building mostly are related to the performance of green building development that is often driven by the criteria and context of the development, limited size of the market, and difficulties in identifying any change in value aspects (tangible benefit) that can be directly attributed to sustainable and green building (Bertrand, 2010; Warren, 2009). Meanwhile, the popularity of going green in all aspects of personal and professional life has made other green initiatives become an important concept and opportunity to earn extra income (MGBC, 2010). These Green movements however have created unprecedented dimensions of comparative advantages. Therefore, the fragmented green initiatives approach of established project in Malaysia is expected to be integrated to form a sustainable venture in corporate business management development. The certified green building, carbon credits, renewable energy, patent inventions and clean technologies present themselves as new world resources and potential economic drivers (Begum & Pereira, 2010; Tick & Shing, 2010). The integration of these green initiatives could be perceived as a new business-model to consider the environment-friendly building as well as generating a side income. It should be designed to reduce greenhouse emissions and combat negative climate changes, thus the building and construction business players would invest on the green development which will not only show their compliance to green and environmental efforts, but also making an additional income. 2.0 The Green Initiatives Development in Malaysia - The Economical Value and Its Potential Malaysia has practically emerged towards sustainable development with a vision on combating the energy insecurity and climate change issues. This is prolong to the fact that, the current risk exposure indicators (likelihood and magnitude) to energy and climate change trends by its urban city; Kuala Lumpur itself exposed to medium threat based on its energy insecurity, energy import dependency, physical exposure and city vulnerability towards the climate change (IPCC and UN, 2010). On the other hand, the building sectors and construction industry are blamed to be responsible for energy and materials consumption besides contributing thirty five to forty five percent of CO2 emissions (Khamidi, 2007; Price et al., 2006). Therefore, the remedy actions are set to undertake the issues particularly on the energy and carbon emission for building category. Among other green initiatives that have been established are series of demonstration projects, development of Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EE&C) Guidelines, Energy Management Program, Government Policies, Green Building scheme, as well as Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) project as shown in Table 1.
16
Table 1: Established Green Initiatives by Malaysian Constitution in Relation to Energy and Building Sectors
No. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 2.0 2.1 2.2 3.0 2.3 3.1 Green Initiative Establishment Guideline Energy Efficiency & Conservation Guidelines for Malaysian Industries Design Strategies for Energy Efficiency in New Buildings (Non-Domestic) Guidelines for Conducting Energy Audits in Commercial Buildings Malaysia Industrial Energy Audit Guidelines MS1525 : 2001-Code of Practice Use of Energy Efficiency and renewable Energy for NonResidential Buildings EE in Buildings Guidelines Energy Management Program Feed-In Tariff ASEAN Energy Management Scheme Energy Audit Government buildings Government Policy Organization MEGTW / KETTHA, MGTC, and UNDP-GEF MEGTW / KETTHA, DANIDA, MPWD / JKR MEGTW / KETTHA and MGTC MEGTW / KETTHA, MGTC, and UNDP-GEF SIRIM Ministry of Energy, Telecommunications & Post Energy Commission MGTC MEGTW / KETTHA MEGTW / KETTHA MEGTW / KETTHA, Energy Commission, and MGTC Year 2007 2004 2004 2003 2001 and 2007 1989 2011 2001 2009 2011
3.2
4.0
Energy Policy-based on 1974 Petroleum Development Act, 1975 National Petroleum Policy, 1980 National Depletion Policy, 1990 Electricity Supply Act, 1993 Gas Supply Acts, 1994 Electricity Regulations, 1997 Gas Supply Regulation and the 2001 Energy Commission Act. Green Building Scheme Green Building Index
The National Green Technology Policy
Varies
4.1
5.0 5.1
National Clean Development Mechanism Project 55 energy projects were registered with CDM EB and 5 energy projects has issued CERs
GBI Sdn Bhd (PAM & ACEM) UNFCCC PGEO Energy SB, Felda Palm Industries SB, LDEO Energy SB, SEO Energy SB, and LAFARGE S.A.
20082012 20062010
2009
Source: MGTC, 2010.
The investments in these greenhouse gas emission reductions projects nevertheless, are significant in contributing both to economic and environmental well-being of the country. On the other hand, the market outlook on the environmental sustainability aspect in Malaysia is still new and vulnerable. This is due to the financial dilemma faced by the Malaysian business players to demonstrate their ability to overcome the existing financial or other barriers such as development cost, fragmented fees, risk, and return (MGTC, 2010; Tick and Shing, 2010).Therefore it is a worthwhile to assess the various possibilities to integrate the established green initiatives project innovatively in order to mitigate the issues and concerns pertaining to the cost effectiveness of the project.
17
3.0 The Green Building Index pilot project- Case Study on Green Energy Office The Green Building Index is a green rating tool to guide architects, designers, government bodies, building owners, and developers towards constructing environmentally responsible buildings. It was initiated and will be managed by PAMs newly formed Sustainability Committee. In addition, Green Building Index Sdn Bhd was incorporated in February 2009, a wholly-owned subsidiary of PAM and the Association of Consulting Engineers Malaysia (ACEM), to administrate GBI accreditation and training of GBI Facilitators and Certifiers. The GBI rating tool provides an opportunity for developers and building owners to design and construct green, sustainable buildings that can provide energy savings, water savings, a healthier indoor environment, better connectivity to public transport and the adoption of recycling and greenery for their projects and reduce our impact on the environment. GBI is developed specifically for the Malaysiantropical climate, environmental and developmental context, cultural and social needs. As a result, the 4000 square meters of Malaysian Green Technology Corporation office; The Green Energy Office (GEO) building serves as a green pilot project that provides a platform for proof of the green concept in the subject of sustainable building design. Taking and advantage on the solar potential in 2005, the jointly funded project of GEO building is intended to encourage the long-term cost reduction of non-emitting green house gas (GHG) technologies by installing the Building Integrated Photovoltaic (BIPV) system, and also achieved the GBI (certified) for Non-Residential Building. GEO building proved the sustainability achievement through its energy efficiency strategy by producing electricity in about 1,200 kWp/year but only consume energy about 65kWh/m2/year (without PV contribution) as measured in Building Energy Index (BEI). As compared to conventional building that would consume energy up to 220 kWph/m2/year, GEO building is likely demonstrate sustainability more than seventy percent in terms of energy efficiency (MGTC, 2010; IEN, 2010). Thus the GEO building in turn contributes to only 23kgCO2/m2/year (MGBC and Chen, 2010) or about 80 percent reduction on CO2 emission intensity per annum as shown in Figure 1. Table 2: GEO Building Reduces 70 Percent Energy Consumption as Compared to Conventional Building
Description Energy Index Energy Consumption 698,500 kWh / year 206,375 kWh / year 70.5%
A. Conventional building B. GEO building (Savings= A-B)
220 kWh / m2 / year 155 kWh / m2 / year 65 kWh / m2/ year
Percentage savings
492,125 kWh / year

Source: MGTC, 2010
-60 -70 -80
Figure 1: GEO Building Demonstrates High CO2 Emission Savings

Source: IEN Consultants, 2010.
18
3.1 GBI Certification Guarantees Government Incentives GBI has become an important initiative that promises a significant outcome to the certified green building movement in Malaysia (MGBC and Chen, 2010; Tan, 2009). However, the community is still hesitant about embracing the green concept due to misgivings about the quality standard of this green model whether it would benefit building and its economies. Therefore, to encourage its implementation, the GBI as supported by the Malaysian government; has subsidized the Malaysian new framework and will guarantee the reimbursement to the investor with government incentives. In lieu to this effort, the government has granted the organization or building owners who are obtaining the certified green building with two types of incentives generally on company tax exemption and stamp duty exemption (MGBC and Chen, 2010). The eligibility of GBI for GBI incentives are based on the buildings that have been awarded the GBI certificate of any grade is eligible to be considered for GBI incentives. The criteria are; Energy Efficiency (38%), Indoor Environmental Quality, Sustainable site Planning and Management, Material and Resources (9%), Water Efficiency, and Innovation (9%) 3.2 GBI certified of GEO building- EE and RE integrated value, economical value, and potentials It is forecasted that the photo voltaic system as integrated to GEO building could achieve BEI 35kWph/ m2/year. Therefore, more energy saving out of EE and RE performance that is expected to contribute an economical value on the investment of certified green building with building integrated photovoltaic system. According to the study that has been simulated by Bagdad (2011), hypothetically, if a 4000sqm commercial green building adopt the same mechanism and design as GEO building does; more than 80 percent operational cost saving of EE and RE performance alone (regardless of water saving) can be achieved from certified green building with BIPV technology which can be translated into about RM233, 000 a year. As opposed to the conventional building, it is expected that business operation could recover the expenditure on green buildings approximately 5.8 years of operation (rental collection, cost saving on energy efficiency, and tax exemption). The study also hypothesizes that, the commercial green building is highly potential to an incretion of yearly revenue up to 21% as compared to conventional building. 4.0 Energy Efficiency and Energy Conservation building- Case study on Low Energy Office The scrutinize on energy use of a building as explicitly addressed in Ninth Malaysian Plan (9MP) has led the government to consider Energy Efficiency (EE) and energy saving features to the government buildings. Therefore, the Low Energy office (LEO) building has completed in 2004 thus becomes the first government initiatives to undertake the EE assessment on this Ministry of Energy, Green Technology, and Water office building. The energy efficient features as adopted by LEO building are including the daylighting, EE lighting, EE office equipment, EE ventilation, controls & Sensors, buildings orientation, insulation, and energy management. LEO building incorporates the EE features through integrated building design process and computer simulation (Begum and Pereira, 2010). Besides, this 20,000 square meters building has achieved a promising energy saving by consumed only 114 kWh / m2/ year as measured in building energy index (Tick and Shing, 2010). As compared to conventional building which consumed about 275 kWh / m2/ year, LEO building saves almost 60 percent of energy conservation through EE features (as shown in Table 3) and shaves-off about 60 percent of CO2 emission (Figure 1). Table 3: LEO building Reduces 60 Percent Energy Consumption Compared to Conventional Building.
Description Energy Index Energy Consumption 5, 290, 175 kWh / year 2, 193, 018 kWh / year 60%
A. Conventional building (Savings= A-B) B. LEO building
275 kWh / m2 / year 161 kWh / m2 / year 114 kWh / m2/ year
Percentage savings
3, 097, 157 kWh / year

Source: MGTC, 2010
19
4.1 LEO building- EE economical Value and Potentials Taking into account the mission on lowering energy consumption in a building, the LEO building however demonstrates attractive economical value based on its operational cost- saving. Nonetheless, LEO building base cost of RM 50 million only takes up about 5 percent of additional cost on installing EE features which is equivalent to RM 5.048 million. According to Begum and Pereira (2010), LEO building is estimated to achieve more than50% cost saving which can be translated into approximately RM600, 000 a year. Tick and Shing (2010) also has analyzed that the estimated energy consumption on cooling and electrical energy as shown in Table 4 indicates that, the operational cost saving on energy based on EE features is feasibly economical to a commercial building. This is because, if the LEO building demonstrates a payback period around 8.4 years over the investment on EE features, hypothetically, the commercial building may have a return on investment less than three years (IEN, 2010). Table 4: LEO Building Yields More than 50 Percent of Operational Cost Saving on Energy as Compared to Conventional Building. Description (based on a/c area of 19,200m2) Energy Cost (RM/year) Electrical Total Energy 620, 000 338, 000 45.5 % 282, 000 1, 099, 000 493, 000 55.1 % 604, 000
A. Conventional building B. LEO building (Savings= A-B)
275 kWh / m2 / year 114 kWh / m2/ year 60 % 161 kWh / m2 / year
Energy
Cooling
Percentage savings
67.4 %
478, 000 156, 000 322, 000
Source: Tick and Shing, 2010
5.0 Clean Development Mechanism- Case study on Malaysian Carbon Credit trading Carbon Credit is a new definition term of assigning a value to a reduction or offset of greenhouse gas emissions as compensation to voluntary effort of the firm towards Malaysian Green mission; additionality and contributions to sustainable development. A carbon credit is usually equivalent to one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e). MGBC (2010) affirmed that the CDM facilitates Annex 1 countries purchase or claim CERs from projects implemented in developing countries (non Annex 1 countries) to be used for meeting their emissions reduction targets. Projects that qualify for CDM include the following: end-use energy efficiency, supply-side energy efficiency, renewable energy, fuel switching, agriculture, industrial processes, solvent and other product use, waste management, and sinks (afforestation and reforestation). According to Malaysia Energy Center (MEC), the agricultural and natural resources-rich lead to biomass plants projects in Malaysia that has 100 million tonnes of carbon credit, which can be translated into some RM5 billion in revenues. CDM related carbon trading in Malaysia is expected to surge in the next few years from demands by European Unions to meet target reductions by 2012. According to MGTC (2010), Malaysia has 55 registered CDM EB projects on energy while 5 projects have issued Certified Emission Rates (CERs). The total CERs has been traded is about 708, 028 tonnes which amounting to approximately USD 7.1 million (RM 24.1 million) 5.1 Carbon Credit on CDM Energy Business-economical value and Potentials The investments in this greenhouse gas emission reductions project will significantly contributing both to economic and environmental well-being of the country. The mission of carbon credit as studied by this paper eventually to develop a sustainable green building and renewable energy projects, that to eliminate or reduce carbon dioxide emissions which will reduce our dependence on old diesel, oil, gas or coal fired electric generators. Therefore those Companies and electric utilities in countries have a solution to buy these emission reduction carbon credits to replace the emissions from their coal burning electric power plants. The estimated transaction costs in average for the small-scale CDM projects is RM 55,000 and for the larger scale projects is RM 120,000 which may make some potential CDM projects lessattractive (CDM, 2010).
20
6.0 Feed-In tariff- Malaysia review In developing the Renewable Energy sectors, Malaysia have adopts sophisticated system of Feed-in Tariffs and renewable energy targets differentiated by technology. In additions, Malaysias policy includes specific targets for each technology by year. For example, in 2011 Malaysias quota for solar PV is 29 MW and in 2012 the target is an additional 46 MW. Approximately, one-third of the solar Photo Voltaic (PV) capacity is set aside for projects less than 1 MW in size. The value that has been offered is ranging from RM1.23 / kWh to RM0.85 / kWh according to energy supply capacity (Table 5) excluding the bonuses. Malaysia expects to have installed more than 3,000 MW of renewable energy by 2020, of which about one-third (1,250 MW) will be from solar PV, and another one-third from biomass (1,065 MW). Table 5: Renewable Tariffs for Solar PV in Malaysia
Description <4 kW >4 kW <24 kW >24 kW <72 kW >72 kW < 1,000 kW > 1 MW < 10 MW > 10 MW < 30 MW Bonus for rooftop Bonus for BIPV Bonus for local modules Bonus for local inverters
Source: MEGTW, 2011
Years 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21
MYR/kWh 1.23 1.20 1.18 1.14 0.95 0.85 0.26 0.25 0.03 0.01
(4.191) 0.293 0.286 0.282 0.272 0.227 0.203 0.062 0.060 0.007 0.002
/kWh
CAD/kWh (1.370) 0.402 0.392 0.386 0.373 0.311 0.278 0.085 0.082 0.010 0.003
USD/kWh (1.369) 0.402 0.392 0.386 0.372 0.310 0.278 0.085 0.082 0.010 0.003
Degression -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0% -8.0%
7.0 The Conceptual Venture of Integrated Green Development Project Based on the case study analysis on the green initiatives development in Malaysia, the researcher has attempted to work out a potential venture to propose an integrated green development project out of established development as mention earlier. Hypothetically, it is expected that the result could diversify the possibilities on embarking more than two green projects combined into one sustainable project or development. The working simulation will be solely on data applicable as mentioned in the case study and also described in item 3.1 to 3.3. The conceptual model of integrated green development project venture is shown in Figure 2. 7.1 The Building Composition, Projects Economical Value, and Projects Feasible outcome According to the case study analysis, building range from 4000sqm to 20,000 sqm is sufficient to cater the crucial integrated elements of green initiatives such as energy efficiency and renewable energy features. The case study also suggested that by adopting certified green building under the GBI scheme, compensable government incentives is guaranteed specifically on tax exemption and stamp duty exemption. The energy efficient features on energy that can be adopted are day lighting, EE lighting, EE office equipment, EE ventilation, controls & Sensors, buildings orientation, insulation, and energy management as demonstrated by LEO building. Meanwhile, to harvest the renewable energy benefit the building integrated photo voltaic system can be installed as part of the building envelopes that has been practiced by GEO building. The study estimated that, for a building range 4,000sqm to 20,000sqm that comprises of energy efficiency and renewable energy features; at least the sum of RM20 million to RM 50 million need to be inlayed. The precedent study on LEO and GEO building shows that, approximately 5 percent to 18 percent is invested on the energy efficiency while 15 percent more on the solar photo voltaic system on an average of 766 sqm of the building area (roof top). To embark the business on renewable energy under the feed-in tariff scheme, the cost practically incurred to installation
21
of solar photo voltaic, whereby in this case, 1200 kWhp can be generated on merely RM3 million as demonstrated by GEO building. In view of the fact that energy efficiency and renewable energy shaves-off about 60 to 80 percent of CO2 emission by conserving the energy, this project is potential to trade its CO2 emission saving by means of carbon credit trading. According to MGTC (2011), an amount of US$40,000 to US$150,000 of transaction is needed to register a project as a CDM project before tradable the Certified Emission Rates (CERs).The simulation study (as shown in Figure 2) analyzes the flow and the feasible outcome out of these green initiatives venture based on the case study result of LEO building, GEO building, CDM-carbon credit trading, and feed-in tariff scheme. It is expected that more than two business make up the revenue, an operational cost saving, and tradable CO2 saving become the side income out of this project or development. PROPOSED INTEGRATED GREEN DEVELOPEMENT PROJECT
Green Initiatives Certified GBI office -area: 4,000 sqm up to 20,000 sqm Cost and Impact Building cost RM 20-50 million Feasible Outcome
Main revenue
Building designed with EE and RE features - Passive and active design for energy efficiency - Install BIPV
Additional EE and RE cost 5% to 33 %
Efficiency features tackle the energy use of the building 50% to 70% operational cost-saving
RE outcome procured to Feed-In Tariff -Sum energy saleable
Cost incurred to RE RE from Solar PV produces 1.2MW Cost incurred to registration only CO2 saving of RE and EE performance
RE from solar PV profit Incremental revenue
CO2 emission procured into CDM -Carbon credit trading
CERs traded and CSRs achieved Side Income Government Incentives
Figure 2: The Conceptual Model for Green Initiatives Venture of Integrated Green Development Project 8.0 Conclusion The simulation study result had shown an innovative business proposal to the developer, building owner, and investor on how to harvest the green initiatives benefit. The study nevertheless hypothesize that, an investment on single green property could resulting more than two business to make up the revenue, an operational cost saving, and tradable CO2 saving become the side income out of this project or development. However, the main conclusion is that, since the LEO and GEO building is a non-profit (generation) building therefore, this simulation needs to be validated through a real-based business proposal that is potential to be an innovative projects proposal to the sustainable industry in
22
MAIN REVENUE + INCREMENTAL REVENUE + COST SAVING + SIDE INCOME = SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS
Commercial Office for rent
Malaysia. The conceptual model of the Green juxtaposition initiative need to justify that building green can be a low cost but profitable if the business strategy aim on green economy out of green property is structured sensibly. 9.0 Acknowledgements The authors are thankful to the MGTC and MEGTW officer in providing necessary assistant from time to time for completion of this paper. The authors wish to compliments to the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (MOHE) in providing the fundamental research grant scheme (FRGS) to facilitate the research process described in this paper. 10.0 References Bagdad, M. (2011). Venturing GBI-NREB into Carbon Credit: a sustainable framework for Malaysian Green Property and Green Economy, Finland: Conference proceeding of SB11: World Sustainable Building Conference, 18-22 October 2011, Helsinki, Finland. Begum, R.A. and Pereira, J.J. (2010). GHG Emissions and Energy Efficiency Potential in the Building Sector of Malaysia, Autralian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 4(10) pp.5012-5017. Bertrand, L., (2010). How can developers harvest the benefits of green building while reducing the risks and cost green building accreditation? Malaysia: Presentation paper for a Conference on Sustainable Building South East Asia, May 5, Kuala Lumpur. Dunphy, D., Griffiths, A. and Benn, S. (2007). Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability- A Guide for Leaders and Change Agents of the Future, 2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge. Ellison, L., and Sayce, S. (2007). Assessing sustainability in the existing commercial property stock. Journal of Property Management, Vol.25 No.3, pp.287-304. IEN Consultants (2010). Low Energy Buildings-GEO and ST Diamond Building. Singapore: Slide presentation on September 15, SGBC Green Building Conference & World GBC International Congress 2010, Sands. Lorenz, D., Truck, S., and Lutzkendof, T. (2007). Exploring the relationship between the sustainability of construction and market value: theoretical basics and initial empirical results from the residential property sector. Journal of Property Management, Vol. 25, pp. 119-49. Malaysia Prime Minister (2010). Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015: Prime Minister Malaysia foreword. Malaysia: The Economic Planning Unit, Prime Ministers Department Putrajaya. pp. iii-iv. MGBC and Chen (2010). New Life for old-plugging the leaks in existing building. Malaysia: Presentation paper on April 26, at the launch of Non-Residential Existing Building (NREB), Kuala Lumpur. MGTC (2010). Green Energy Office and Green TownShip. Malaysia: Slide presentation on October 21, One Day Seminar on Green Technology and Renewable Energy, Selangor, p.p 9-22. M.F., Khamidi (2007). Development of Building Assessment Tool for evaluation of Purpose Built Building (PBOs) Life Cycle Management: Benchmarking and assessment for environmental performance. Malaysia: Presentation paper for a Conference on Sustainable Building South East Asia, 5-7 November 2007, Kuala Lumpur. Miller, N., Spivey, J. and Florence, A. (2008). Does green pay off. Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management, Vol. 14 No. 4, p. 15. Tan, L.M. (2009). The Development of GBI Malaysia (GBI). Malaysia: Presentation paper on April 23, at the launch of GBI. Kuala Lumpur.
23
Tick, H.O., and Shing, C.C. (2010). Energy efficiency and carbon trading potential in Malaysia, A Journal on Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, pp 2095-2103. Thor, K. (2008). Green Building market report 2008-A Horizon for Malaysias building? Green Building Market Report 2008: A survey of 2,000 AEC Professionals for BCI Asia, in Australia, Southeast Asia and China in the second half of 2007. Tan, L.M. (2009). The Development of GBI Malaysia (GBI). Malaysia:Presentation paper on April 23, at the launch of GBI. Kuala Lumpur. Thor, K. (2008). Green Building market report 2008-A Horizon for Malaysias building?. Green Building Market Report 2008: A survey of 2,000 AEC Professionals for BCI Asia, in Australia, Southeast Asia and China in the second half of 2007. Ting, K.H. (2009). Promoting Green Buildings: An Index is now in place in Malaysia to rate such properties. Starbiz News April. Von, K.L. (2010). Plugging the leaks in existing buildings. Slide presentation on Green Buiding Index on April 26, at The Launch of NREB: New Life For Old. Kuala Lumpur. Warren, C. (2009). Measures of environmentally sustainable development and their effect on property asset value - An Australian perspective. University of Queensland Business School, St Lucia, Australia. Property Management, Vol.28 no.2, 2010 pp.68-79.
24

Mohammad Shahrizal Mohammad Idris Global Facilities Management Sdn Bhd, Taman Melawati ,Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (E-mail: shah@globalfm.com.my)
FACILITY MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTION IN GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVES

Abstract Facility Management (FM) is a best practice that is currently well accepted in most countries around the world. It is a balanced of knowledge, skill and attitude in managing built environment against the mid to long term objective of any organisation to achieve the highest possible return on investment. However, not many people understand the role of a facility manager in delivering sustainability initiatives within the built environment. In recent development of this profession in Malaysia, the function of a facility manager has becoming more strategic in nature in delivering the corporate objectives. This includes the implementation of organisational Green Building initiatives. Climate change has been described as the biggest global threat of the 21st century and it is likely to affect the lifestyle and health of people worldwide. This paper is focussed to elaborate some key facility management practices that will enable organisation to benefit in achieving sustainability within their workplace environment. Today, FM has a bigger role to play with the introduction of Private Finance Initiative method of development of strategic infrastructure assets in the country. The involvement of FM as early as the planning, design, procurement, construction and transition phases are seen to be proactive in nature towards addressing sustainable development requirements. New demarcation of roles, responsibilities and functions of the stakeholders will provide a better result in achieving greater Quality of Life expected outcome for the next generation. Keywords Facility Management, Sustainability, Sustainable Development, Green Building, Quality of Life 1.0 Introduction Facility Management (FM) is a best practice that is currently well accepted in most countries around the world. It is a balanced of knowledge, skill and attitude in managing built environment against the mid to long term objective of any organisation to achieve the highest possible return on investment. Asset owners both in the government and private sectors face an uphill battle when dealing with issues relating to FM. The uncertainty of function and not able to clearly define the FM core domains has brought facility owners to develop various approaches in managing their built environment. Key issues that surround FM are generally related to the workplace, which is required to perform to its design specification and purpose. It is difficult to generalised the definition, role and responsibilities of FM in relation to the workplace, but
25
there are some common topics that strand together to offer FM its identity. The works of Tay and Ooi (2001) had successfully identified three common concerns in FM: First, the focus of FM is the workplace. The workplace in this instance refers to a place where work (of any nature) is carried out. Thus, it is not limited to commercial office buildings but also includes other types of workplaces such as medical, educational and industrial workplaces. Second, FM is applicable to all organisations because they all occupy space for their work. Third, FM plays a supporting role in enhancing the performance of the firm. Over the last ten years, researchers and practitioners alike have provided many definitions for FM which specify the objective and scope in many different environments. Some of the most commonly presented definitions are as follows: 1. Facility management is a profession that encompasses multiple disciplines to ensure functionality of the built environment by integrating people, place, process and technology. http:// www.ifma.org/resources/what-is-fm/default.htm viewed in October 2011 2. Facilities management is the integration of processes within an organisation to maintain and develop the agreed services which support and improve the effectiveness of its primary activities. - http://www.bifm.org.uk/bifm/about/facilities viewed in October 2011. 3. A discipline that improves and supports the productivity of an organisation by delivering all needed appropriate services, infrastructures, etc. that are needed to achieve business objectives RICS Practice Standards UK 2009. The above definitions on FM had shown that managing facilities is a multi-faceted undertaking. Most people often find themselves confused over the term Facility Management whether they are in charge of one or all aspects of FM. In Malaysia, FM has always being associated with the management of services in physical infrastructures such as offices, commercial centres, hospitals, tertiary education campuses, multi-purpose buildings and other similar facilities occupied by users performing various types of activities. The scope of service varies from one type of facilities to another depending on the specific user needs to deliver the organisational vision, mission and objective. In a study conducted by the Construction Industry Development Board of Malaysia in 2009, it was found that the FM practice exist within the service industry and currently being accepted as part of an outsourcing strategy implemented by in both public and private sectors to improve the delivery systems and reducing operational costs. Based on a survey resulting from the CIDB study, the FM in Malaysia is defined as The management of multi-disciplinary activities to ensure continuous functionality of the built environment by linking and integrating people, place, processes and technology (CIDB, 2009). 2.0 Evolution of FM in Malaysia The massive infrastructure development project in the 6th Malaysian Plan (1990 - 1995) on transportation, communication, energy, education and public health infrastructures had provided the platform for the country to expedite public service modernisation and urbanisation. The private sector had been given much bigger role to generate growth in the development but not much of FM outsourcing activities were awarded. During the 7th Malaysian Plan (1996 2000), the government has decided to embark on a long-term full scale FM outsourcing programmes involving the privatisation of the public health support services by the Ministry of Health. The objective of this exercise is to improve significantly the public hospital services thus increasing the standard and quality of living for citizen. The demand for higher standard of FM services from the private sector keep on escalating with the completion of various mega-projects at the end of the 7th Malaysian Plan. Mega- projects such as the KL International Airport, National Sports Complex Bukit Jalil, Petronas Twin Towers and the KL Formula-1 International Circuit had given the nation the challenge to uplift the operation and maintenance standards to a higher platform.
26
The need to further enhance overall Quality of Life came in strongly during the 8th Malaysian Plan (2001 2005) whereby the Government has introduced the National Vision Policy which incorporated the New Economic Policy and National Development Policy as the thrust in achieving fully developed nation by 2020. One of the critical thrust under this policy is pursuing environmentally sustainable development to reinforce long-term growth of the nation. Effort needed to implement this policy requires active participation of professionals in built environment to measure the impact and effectiveness of operational planning in delivering high quality social services in both public and private sectors. In the 9th Malaysian Plan (2006 2010), the private sectors were given the leading role to generate economic growth through active Public-Private Partnership programmes. One key aspects of this function is to inculcate Maintenance Culture in managing the current and future development of public assets. In April 2009, a new policy on asset management know as Dasar Pengurusan Aset Kerajaan was launched to address the immediate need to improve how the public physical infrastructures should be planned, constructed, operated and disposed. Today, FM has a bigger role to play with the introduction of Private Finance Initiative method of development of strategic infrastructure assets in the country. The involvement of FM as early as the planning, design, procurement, construction and transition phases are seen to be proactive in nature towards addressing sustainable development requirements. New demarcation of roles, responsibilities and functions of the stakeholders will provide a better result in achieving greater Quality of Life expected outcome for the next generation. 3.0 Sustainable Facility Management When it comes to operating a facility in a more sustainable manner, managers typically think about the contribution of the activity within the facility that has a direct or non-direct impact to the environmental and well-being of the users in that built environment. Sustainability means meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, as defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland Commission, 1987). The role of a facility manager is vital in ensuring this objective can be achieved. The key success factor is greatly depending on the awareness of the environmental preservation emphasising the integration of the environmental issues in the economic and social development plan. In this context, the function of a facility manager can be divided into three major contributions in the area of social, environmental and economic improvement. In promoting sustainability among FM professionals, the British Institute of Facilities Management (BIFM) has published a guide know as The Good Practice Guide to Implementing a Sustainable Policy. This document provides the guide for organisation to develop a sustainability policy that defines the scope and extent of processes to ensuring its success. The matrix in Table 1, 2 and 3 below provides a practical approach to relating different sustainable activities that can be focussed by FM professionals. The index of relationship (direct or indirect) and degree of influence (high or low) of a sustainable activity on each sustainability issue for the three areas of improvements are tabulated accordingly in these figures. Based on the BIFM 2008 guide, the matrix is meant to: Provide your organisation with the starting point to understand and identifying the impact of its activities on social and environmental issues;
Provide a practical, flexible framework for wide-participatory brain-storming.
Highlights the potential economic benefits of each measure on your organisations financial performance; and
27
Table 1: Sustainable Practice Versus Sustainable Issue in Social

SOCIAL Health/ Safety Wellbeing/ comfort Knowledge skills Public service Behaviour Community development DH DH DH IH IL DH Increase awareness DH
Sustainable Practice Versus Sustainable Issues
Energy Management Waste Management Water Management Ethical Procurement Green Business Travel Community Engagement
IH
IL
IL
DH
DH
IH
DH
DH
DH
DL
DH
IL
DH
DL
DH
DH
DH
IH
DH
IH
DH
DL
IL
IH
IH
IH
DH
IL
IL
DH
DL
DL
DH
DH
DL
Note
Direct / High Influence Direct / Low Influence Indirect / High Influence Indirect / Low Influence
DH DL IH IL
28
Table 2: Sustainable Practice versus Sustainable Issue in Environmental

ENVIRONMENTAL Biodiversity Clean technology and R&D Increase awareness Harmful emission Landfill Sustainable Practice versus Sustainable Issues Energy Management Waste Management Water Management Ethical Procurement Green Business Travel Community Engagement Legislation DH DH DH DH IL IH DH DH DH DH IL IL Legislation
29
DH DH DH DH DH IL
IL DL DH DH IL DL
IL DH IL DH IL DL
DH DL DH DH IL IL
DH DH DL DH DH DH
Table 3: Sustainable Practice versus Sustainable Issue in Economic

ECONOMIC Cost reduction / supply chain Brand strength Cost of capital Legal liability / fines DH DH DH DH IL DH New market / R&D
Energy Management Waste Management Water Management Ethical Procurement Green business travel Community engagement
DH DH DH DH DH IL
DH DH DH DH IL DH
IL IL IL DH DH DH
DH DH DL DH IL IL
DH DH DH DH DL DH
IH IH IL IH IL DH
Note
Direct / High Influence Direct / Low Influence Indirect / High Influence Indirect / Low Influence
DH DL IH IL
Employee attraction
Sustainable Practice versus Sustainable issues
Productivity
Sustainability is the world agenda today. Based on the matrices above, it is clear that a Facility Manager can contribute significantly in achieving the required output that has direct impact to the society, economic and environmental factors of the community. Good FM practise in managing built environment is about is about making the buildings more sustainable by: Reducing the consumption of resources such as water and energy; Having better building practices and designs; Increasing recycling or the use of recycled materials; and Reducing CO2 emissions from the buildings.
4.0 Relationship between FM and Green Building Climate change has been described as the biggest global threat of the 21st century and it is likely to affect the lifestyle and health of people worldwide. The threat posed by the change in climate may include changing patterns of infectious diseases, flooding, heat waves and rising sea-levels (Dapo and Monte, 2010). Due to this fact, the sustainability issue is considered the greatest challenge to mankind today. The effort for improvement must take cognisant of the need to address operational requirement and constraint at the earliest possible period in any development life-cycle period. In relation to any built environment, the building life cycle will be going through the process of planning, designing, procurement, construction, transitional/handing-over, operational planning, maintenance, performance monitoring, refurbishment and disposal. This whole life cycle of buildings will have considerable impact on the environment during construction, throughout their operation, and finally during decommissioning at end-of-life. Green buildings are also referred to as sustainable buildings are structure which was built for one focus in mind: to reduce their impact on the environment (Ingeniur, 2011). A good green design should consume less energy, water and hazardous chemical or materials for its operation and maintenance purpose. A building should only be regarded a true green building when the system or equipment are less prone to vandalism, reliable, needs less maintenance and involve less impact to the environment to maintain it or dispose it. Ultimately, the longer life of a building and its components, the lesser impact it would impose for its maintenance activities. If need be, whenever any of the building components must be disposed, there should be huge percentage of recyclable materials in the components. A Facility Manager must play significant role to ensure that green buildings are designed, constructed, operated and disposed in the most efficient manner that will not only reduce the use of resources but also provide comfort, safety and secure environment to the user. The practice in FM in managing green buildings has always being focussed on key operational aspects such as: minimizing site impacts; managing and minimizing waste during construction; reducing energy demand and consumption; improving indoor air and environmental quality; optimizing operation and maintenance costs extending the service life of the building and its components; minimizing water consumption; efficiently using resources and materials; improving environmental health; ensuring occupant safety; and Increasing overall facilities efficiency.
30
Sustainability concept in managing green building also takes into consideration the availability of resources required to ensure the functionality of the built environment is not jeopardised. Facility managers are often challenged on the availability of replacement components of engineering systems or buildings when it is due to change after reaching its maximum life cycle. Total change due of obsolesces, rapid technological advancement and shortage of supply in the market are among examples of situations whereby Facility Managers will have to spend a lot of time, money and effort to manage waste. The trend and development of sustainability and management of green building among facility managers around the world has becoming compulsory. According to a research done by IFMA early 2011, it was found that the sustainability topic has moved up from fourth place in 2008 to being ranked as top priority by end of 2010. In most developed countries, it has becoming a common practice to work in sustainable manner being green has becoming part of the organisations policy. In some cases there seem to be great demand from the customers for the facility management practitioners to implement sustainability policies in order to comply with authority requirements. Respond from a study conducted in the Dutch facility management market in 2011, facility managers today are required to implement energy saving measures, purchasing sustainable products and stimulating staff towards sustainable behaviour to achieve the most desirable quality of life while preserving the environment and its resources. 5.0 Critical Success Factor Generally, the stakeholders of any given built environment will need to play their roles accordingly to ensure green building initiatives are well implemented. Asset owner, asset manager, facility manager, service provider and users are bound to certain level of responsibilities in realising the effort to achieve the desired output. Asset owners will be solely responsible to provide the capital and operational funding for the purpose to operate and maintain the built environment. Asset managers or also known as property managers in the Malaysian real estate market will need to focus on revenue generating activities for the built environment that will provide return for the asset owners. A Facility manager in respect to built environment will definitely be looking after the efficacy of operation and maintenance activities, management of resources, establishment of work processes and managing overall output performance. The service provider on the other hand will be responsible to deliver the services according to the specifications and agreed service levels with the clients organisations. The clear demarcation of role and responsibilities among the stakeholders are important to ensure that individuals within the built environment understands the scope of delivery, limitations and the roll-out plan in particularly implementing green building initiatives. The success of delivering sustainable environment and managing green building effectively depend largely on the individual understand and organisational commitment towards sustainability. Transformational change in mindset amongst the built environment stakeholders must be done systematically to ensure success in the implementation plan. The development towards a knowledge economy, the increase in complexity of the environment, the ascent of a new generation and technological developments force organisations consider fresh work methods (Ellen and Jelle, 2011). In the realm of built environment, the change-agent over the period life of an asset will be the people, work processes and technology. Hence, it is important that the facility manager should understand clearly their role in managing green building in order to achieve the sustainability objectives of the organisation and nation at large. 6.0 The Author Mohammad Shahrizal Mohammad Idris is Executive Director of Global Facilities Management Sdn Bhd (GFM). He is also the board members of GFM Solutions Sdn Bhd, GFM Qatar LLC and Saudi Malaysia Facility Management LLC. Currently he is the Secretary of the Malaysian Association of Facility Management (MAFM) for 2011/13 and formerly a member of the Government Asset Management Working Committee for the preparation of the Manual Pengurusan Aset Menyeluruh 2009.
31
7.0 References Bill Gregory (2010). A Checklist for Meeting Green Goals. Facility Management Journal. July/September 2010, pp 67-69. Dapo Williams and Monty Sutrisna (2010). An evaluation of the role of facilities managers in managing sustainability and remedial actions in reducing CO2 emissions in the built environment. The Construction, Building and Real Estate Research Conference of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors held at Dauphine Universit, Paris, 2-3 September 2010. Diane Coles (2011). Sustainable Home Embodied Energy in Residential Property Development. Facility Management Journal. September/October 2011, pp 26-30. Ellen Gijsbers and Jelle Van Der Kluit (2011). International Trends in Facility Management. Facility Management Journal. May/June 2011, pp 36-39. Lembaga Jurutera Malaysia (2011). Building Upon The Sustainable Way. The Ingenieur. Volume 02 June - August 2011, pp 18-26. Lembaga Jurutera Malaysia (2011). Green Engineering Innovation German Leads The Way. The Ingenieur. Volume 01 April June 2011, pp 36-41. Linda Tay and Joseph T.L. Ooi (2001). Facilities Management: a Jack of All Trade?. Facilities. Volume 19 No. 10 pp. 357-362. Mohammad Shahrizal Mohammad Idris (2007). Perception and Performance Measurement in Facilities Management Outsourcing. MSc Thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Sarich Chotipanich and Bev Nutt (2008). Positioning and repositioning FM. Facilities. Volume 26 No. 9/10 pp. 374-388. University of Reading (2008). The Good Practice Guide to Implementing a Sustainability Policy. British Institute of Facilities Management (BIFM) Good Practice Guide. CIDB (2009), Study on the Development of Asset and Facility Management Program for the Malaysian Construction Industry. Construction Industry Development Board of Malaysia (unpublished material).
32

PJH UiTM Proceeding

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PJH UiTM Proceeding

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and Greetings to all, Putrajaya was designed as a sustainable development even in its inception stage

GREEN CONSTRUCTION AND INNOVATION: METHOD, TECHNIQUES, AND RESOURCES

CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY AND INVESTMENT ON GREEN DEVELOPMENT

GREEN INITIATIVES VENTURE OF INTEGRATED GREEN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

FACILITY MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTION IN GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVES

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

GREEN CONSTRUCTION AND INNOVATION: METHOD, TECHNIQUES AND RESOURCES

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY AND INVESTMENT ON GREEN DEVELOPMENT

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

GREEN INITIATIVES VENTURE OF INTEGRATED GREEN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

The National Green Technology Policy

Source: MGTC, 2010.

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

A. Conventional building B. GEO building (Savings= A-B)

220 kWh / m2 / year 155 kWh / m2 / year 65 kWh / m2/ year

492,125 kWh / year

-60 -70 -80

Figure 1: GEO Building Demonstrates High CO2 Emission Savings

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

A. Conventional building (Savings= A-B) B. LEO building

3, 097, 157 kWh / year

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

A. Conventional building B. LEO building (Savings= A-B)

478, 000 156, 000 322, 000

Source: Tick and Shing, 2010

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

Additional EE and RE cost 5% to 33 %

RE outcome procured to Feed-In Tariff -Sum energy saleable

RE from solar PV profit Incremental revenue

CO2 emission procured into CDM -Carbon credit trading

CERs traded and CSRs achieved Side Income Government Incentives

Commercial Office for rent

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

FACILITY MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTION IN GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVES

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

Provide a practical, flexible framework for wide-participatory brain-storming.

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

Table 1: Sustainable Practice Versus Sustainable Issue in Social

Sustainable Practice Versus Sustainable Issues

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development

Table 2: Sustainable Practice versus Sustainable Issue in Environmental

Table 3: Sustainable Practice versus Sustainable Issue in Economic

Sustainable Practice versus Sustainable issues