Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo; Wubishet Jekale Mengesha; Daniel Lirebo Sokido

doi:doi:10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14

| Peer-Reviewed

Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo, Wubishet Jekale Mengesha, Daniel Lirebo Sokido

Published in Urban and Regional Planning (Volume 7, Issue 2)

Received: 26 February 2022 Accepted: 7 April 2022 Published: 31 May 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Sustainable/green buildings can save for 36% of total energy use, 65% of electricity consumption, and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, 30% of raw materials use, 30% of waste output, and 12% of potable water consumption. Several sustainable/green building assessment tools were existed and used by both developed and developing countries. However; Ethiopia's buildings were not critically assessed and evaluated from sustainability points of view because there was no such type of studies conducted so far. This paper aims to explore the most significant and widely used as well as the basis for other sustainable/green building assessment tools such as Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE), Sustainable Building Tool (SBTool), Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme (CEPAS), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), Green Mark and Green Star. The methodology employed for this paper is the selection of the 10 most commonly and widely utilized SBATs from the 57 SBATs based on desk review and document analysis. The results of the study identified that all these 10 SBATs have their own assessment categories and criteria based on many factors like climatic conditions, availability of resources plus methods employed demographic dynamics, and legal aspects of the sector for assessing the sustainable/green buildings. It distinguishes the most commonly and repeatedly used assessment categories and criteria and uses a consensus-based approach with experts in the building sectors, a four-quadrant model, and a Circular and Helical flow model, to develop a new sustainable building assessment tool (SBAT) suitable for Ethiopia.

Published in	Urban and Regional Planning (Volume 7, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14
Page(s)	55-67
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Sustainability, Four Quadrant Model, Helical Flow Model, Sustainable/Green Buildings, Assessment Tools

References

[1]	He Y., Kvan T., Liu M., & Li B. (2018). How green building rating systems affect designing green. Building and Environment, 133, 19-31. doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.007.
[2]	Behnam N. (2017): A Review on Sustainable Building (Green Building). Published in: International Journal of Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1 (30 January 2017): pp. 451-459. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/76588.
[3]	J. Steele. (1997). Sustainable Architecture, Principles, Paradigms, and case studies. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.
[4]	Elizabeth Ojo-Fafore, Clinton Aigbavboa and Pretty Remaru. (2018). Benefits of Green Buildings.
[5]	Saleh H., and Yacine R. (2012). Sustainable building assessment tool development approach. Sustainable Cities and Society 5 (2012) 52–62. doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2012.05.004.
[6]	Suchith A., Ananda P., and Rathish P. (2017). Developing a Sustainable Building Assessment Tool (SBAT) for Developing Countries -Case of India. https://www.academia.edu/38054704
[7]	Loftness, V. and D. Haase. (2013). Sustainable Built Environments, New York: Springer Science+ Business Media. http://doi.org/10.1007/987-1-4614-5828-9.
[8]	WGBC. (2016). © World Green Building Council 2016-2021: Green Building Councils and rating tools [Online]. Available: Retrieved from https://www.worldgbc.org/rating-tools.
[9]	BREEAM-NOR, (2019). BREEAM-NOR 2016, New Construction: ECHNICAL MANUAL, SD5075NOR – Ver: 1.2. BREEAMR^®NOR: www.breeam.com, www.byggalliansen.no
[10]	Braune M. (2017). GREEN STAR SA MAURITIUS. Green Building Council of South Africa (GBCSA). www.gbcsa.org.za
[11]	Endo J., Murakami S., and Ikaga T. (2004). Application of a Building Environmental Assessment, CASBEE, and its Influence on the Building Market. https://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB8054.pdf
[12]	CEPAS. (2021). Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme for Buildings. Buildings Department: https://www.bd.gov.hk/en/resources/codes-and-references/notices-and-reports/index_CEPAS.html
[13]	Kibert, C. J. (2012). Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken. DOI: 10.4236/wjet.2016.42018.
[14]	Margarete M., Filipin R., Müller C., and Silva F. (2017). A SUSTENTABILIDADE NA CONSTRUÇÃO CIVIL, ISSN: 2359-1048.
[15]	Green Building Index (2011). GBI Assessment Criteria for Non-Residential Existing Building (NREB). www.greenbuildingindex.org \| info@greenbuildingindex.org
[16]	Bernardi E., Carlucci S., Cornaro C. and Andre R. (2017). An Analysis of the Most Adopted Rating Systems for Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Buildings. Sustainability (2017), 9 (7), 1226; doi: 10.3390/su9071226.
[17]	HQE™, A. (2015). Haute Qualitè Environnementale [cited 2015 Jan]; Available from: http://www.beHQE™.com.
[18]	LEED. (2015). LEED® for Existing Buildings: Operation and Maintenance. http://www.docdatabase.net/more-leed-for-existing-buildings-operations-and-maintenance-1302099.html
[19]	Nils L. (2015). Retrieved from SBTool 2015 Overview. International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment (iiSBE). http://www.iisbe.org/system/files/SBTool%20Overview%2018Jul15.pdf).
[20]	Yusoff, W. and Wen, W. (2014): Analysis of the International Sustainable Building Rating Systems (SBRSs) for Sustainable Development with Special Focused on Green Building Index (GBI) Malaysia. DOI: 10.12966/jecr.02.02.2014.
[21]	Kathy C. (2009). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/research. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo, Wubishet Jekale Mengesha, Daniel Lirebo Sokido. (2022). Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia. Urban and Regional Planning, 7(2), 55-67. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo; Wubishet Jekale Mengesha; Daniel Lirebo Sokido. Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia. Urban Reg. Plan. 2022, 7(2), 55-67. doi: 10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo, Wubishet Jekale Mengesha, Daniel Lirebo Sokido. Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia. Urban Reg Plan. 2022;7(2):55-67. doi: 10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14,
  author = {Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo and Wubishet Jekale Mengesha and Daniel Lirebo Sokido},
  title = {Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia},
  journal = {Urban and Regional Planning},
  volume = {7},
  number = {2},
  pages = {55-67},
  doi = {10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.urp.20220702.14},
  abstract = {Sustainable/green buildings can save for 36% of total energy use, 65% of electricity consumption, and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, 30% of raw materials use, 30% of waste output, and 12% of potable water consumption. Several sustainable/green building assessment tools were existed and used by both developed and developing countries. However; Ethiopia's buildings were not critically assessed and evaluated from sustainability points of view because there was no such type of studies conducted so far. This paper aims to explore the most significant and widely used as well as the basis for other sustainable/green building assessment tools such as Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE), Sustainable Building Tool (SBTool), Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme (CEPAS), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), Green Mark and Green Star. The methodology employed for this paper is the selection of the 10 most commonly and widely utilized SBATs from the 57 SBATs based on desk review and document analysis. The results of the study identified that all these 10 SBATs have their own assessment categories and criteria based on many factors like climatic conditions, availability of resources plus methods employed demographic dynamics, and legal aspects of the sector for assessing the sustainable/green buildings. It distinguishes the most commonly and repeatedly used assessment categories and criteria and uses a consensus-based approach with experts in the building sectors, a four-quadrant model, and a Circular and Helical flow model, to develop a new sustainable building assessment tool (SBAT) suitable for Ethiopia.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia
AU  - Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo
AU  - Wubishet Jekale Mengesha
AU  - Daniel Lirebo Sokido
Y1  - 2022/05/31
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14
T2  - Urban and Regional Planning
JF  - Urban and Regional Planning
JO  - Urban and Regional Planning
SP  - 55
EP  - 67
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1697
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14
AB  - Sustainable/green buildings can save for 36% of total energy use, 65% of electricity consumption, and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, 30% of raw materials use, 30% of waste output, and 12% of potable water consumption. Several sustainable/green building assessment tools were existed and used by both developed and developing countries. However; Ethiopia's buildings were not critically assessed and evaluated from sustainability points of view because there was no such type of studies conducted so far. This paper aims to explore the most significant and widely used as well as the basis for other sustainable/green building assessment tools such as Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE), Sustainable Building Tool (SBTool), Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme (CEPAS), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), Green Mark and Green Star. The methodology employed for this paper is the selection of the 10 most commonly and widely utilized SBATs from the 57 SBATs based on desk review and document analysis. The results of the study identified that all these 10 SBATs have their own assessment categories and criteria based on many factors like climatic conditions, availability of resources plus methods employed demographic dynamics, and legal aspects of the sector for assessing the sustainable/green buildings. It distinguishes the most commonly and repeatedly used assessment categories and criteria and uses a consensus-based approach with experts in the building sectors, a four-quadrant model, and a Circular and Helical flow model, to develop a new sustainable building assessment tool (SBAT) suitable for Ethiopia.
VL  - 7
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo

Department of Architecture, College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Wubishet Jekale Mengesha

Department of Architecture, College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Daniel Lirebo Sokido

Department of Architecture, College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo, Wubishet Jekale Mengesha, Daniel Lirebo Sokido. (2022). Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia. Urban and Regional Planning, 7(2), 55-67. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo; Wubishet Jekale Mengesha; Daniel Lirebo Sokido. Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia. Urban Reg. Plan. 2022, 7(2), 55-67. doi: 10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo, Wubishet Jekale Mengesha, Daniel Lirebo Sokido. Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia. Urban Reg Plan. 2022;7(2):55-67. doi: 10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14,
  author = {Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo and Wubishet Jekale Mengesha and Daniel Lirebo Sokido},
  title = {Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia},
  journal = {Urban and Regional Planning},
  volume = {7},
  number = {2},
  pages = {55-67},
  doi = {10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.urp.20220702.14},
  abstract = {Sustainable/green buildings can save for 36% of total energy use, 65% of electricity consumption, and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, 30% of raw materials use, 30% of waste output, and 12% of potable water consumption. Several sustainable/green building assessment tools were existed and used by both developed and developing countries. However; Ethiopia's buildings were not critically assessed and evaluated from sustainability points of view because there was no such type of studies conducted so far. This paper aims to explore the most significant and widely used as well as the basis for other sustainable/green building assessment tools such as Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE), Sustainable Building Tool (SBTool), Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme (CEPAS), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), Green Mark and Green Star. The methodology employed for this paper is the selection of the 10 most commonly and widely utilized SBATs from the 57 SBATs based on desk review and document analysis. The results of the study identified that all these 10 SBATs have their own assessment categories and criteria based on many factors like climatic conditions, availability of resources plus methods employed demographic dynamics, and legal aspects of the sector for assessing the sustainable/green buildings. It distinguishes the most commonly and repeatedly used assessment categories and criteria and uses a consensus-based approach with experts in the building sectors, a four-quadrant model, and a Circular and Helical flow model, to develop a new sustainable building assessment tool (SBAT) suitable for Ethiopia.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Selection of the Most Appropriate Sustainable Buildings Assessment Categories and Criteria for Developing Countries: Case of Ethiopia
AU  - Mekonnen Abebe Anshebo
AU  - Wubishet Jekale Mengesha
AU  - Daniel Lirebo Sokido
Y1  - 2022/05/31
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14
T2  - Urban and Regional Planning
JF  - Urban and Regional Planning
JO  - Urban and Regional Planning
SP  - 55
EP  - 67
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1697
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.urp.20220702.14
AB  - Sustainable/green buildings can save for 36% of total energy use, 65% of electricity consumption, and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, 30% of raw materials use, 30% of waste output, and 12% of potable water consumption. Several sustainable/green building assessment tools were existed and used by both developed and developing countries. However; Ethiopia's buildings were not critically assessed and evaluated from sustainability points of view because there was no such type of studies conducted so far. This paper aims to explore the most significant and widely used as well as the basis for other sustainable/green building assessment tools such as Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE), Sustainable Building Tool (SBTool), Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme (CEPAS), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), Green Mark and Green Star. The methodology employed for this paper is the selection of the 10 most commonly and widely utilized SBATs from the 57 SBATs based on desk review and document analysis. The results of the study identified that all these 10 SBATs have their own assessment categories and criteria based on many factors like climatic conditions, availability of resources plus methods employed demographic dynamics, and legal aspects of the sector for assessing the sustainable/green buildings. It distinguishes the most commonly and repeatedly used assessment categories and criteria and uses a consensus-based approach with experts in the building sectors, a four-quadrant model, and a Circular and Helical flow model, to develop a new sustainable building assessment tool (SBAT) suitable for Ethiopia.
VL  - 7
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download