Advertisement

Social criteria of sustainable development in relation to green building assessment tools

Abstract

The social criteria of sustainable development, with a focus on green building assessment tool, have remained underexplored. Moreover, a large number of green building assessment tools and social sustainability documentations have been developed and have had a direct impact on social criteria issues, but there seems to be a substantial gap in the study of social criteria in green building assessment tools. The present study aimed at introducing the subject area supported by categories to monitor social criteria in building assessment tool. In light of this argument, this paper, through analysis of frequency data and results of studies, aims to identify some potential factors that will impact building practitioners toward making the right decision for selecting and implementing social criteria in green building assessment tools. In order to organize this paper, it adopts an analytic approach where social criteria would be interpreted in a new position. The aim is to identify social criteria of sustainable development to assist building practitioners in order to assess the building project and embed them toward building assessment tool to achieve sustainable development goal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1

Source: BREEAM (2014)

Fig. 2

Source: LEED (2013)

Fig. 3

Source: CASBEE (2016)

Fig. 4

Source: Larsson (2007)

Fig. 5

Source: GSAS (2017)

Fig. 6

Source: Gibberd (2002)

Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

References

  1. Ahman, H. (2013). Social sustainability- society at the intersection of development and maintenance. Local Environment,18(10), 1153–1166.

  2. Ameen, R. M., Mourshed, M., & Li, H. (2015). A critical review of environmental assessment tools for sustainable urban design. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,55, 110–125.

  3. Awadh, O. (2017). Sustainability and green building rating systems: LEED, BREEAM, GSAS and Estidama critical analysis. Journal of Building Engineering,11, 25–29.

  4. Becker, E., & Jahn, T. (1999). Sustainability and the social sciences. New York: Zed Books.

  5. Berardi, U. (2011). Beyond sustainability assessment systems: Upgrading topics by enlarging the scale of assessment. SUSB,2(4), 276–282.

  6. Berardi, U. (2013). Sustainability assessment of urban communities through rating systems. Environmental Development Sustainability,15, 1573–1591.

  7. Bernardi, E., Carlucci, S., Cornaro, C., & Bohne, R. (2017). An analysis of the most adopted rating systems for assessing the environmental impact of buildings. Sustainability,9(7), 1226.

  8. Biart, M. (2002). Social sustainability as part of the social agenda of the European community. In T. Ritt (Ed.), Soziale Nachhaltigkeit: Von der Umweltpolitik zur Nachhaltigkeit? (pp. 5–10). Arbeiterkammer Wien, Informationen zur Umweltpolitik 149, Wien. Available at http://wien.arbeiterkammer.at/pictures/importiert/Tagungsband_149.pdf.

  9. Bostrom, M. A. (2012). missing pillar? Challenges in theorizing and practicing social sustainability: Introductory article in the special issue. Sustainability,8, 3–14.

  10. Boulding, K. E. (1985). The world as a total system. Beverly Hills, California, USA: Sage.

  11. BREEAM. (2014). BREEAM UK new construction non-domestic buildings technical manual 2014. SD5076 – Issue: 5.0. Accessed 6 October 2017.

  12. BREEAM. (2016). BREEAM international new construction 2016, technical manual SD233—Issue: 1.0. Dublin: BRE Global Ltd.

  13. CASBEE. (2016). CASBEE brochure. Institute of Building Environment and Energy Conservation (IBEC). Retrieved July, 2017, from www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/document/CASBEE_brochure_2016.pdf. Retrieved 10 July 2017.

  14. Casula Vifell, A., & Soneryd, L. (2012). Organizing matters: How “the social dimension” gets lost in sustainability projects. Sustainable Development,20(1), 18–27.

  15. Chan, E., & Lee, K. (2008). Critical factors for improving social sustainability of urban renewal projects. Social Indicators Research,85(2), 243–256.

  16. Chiu, R. L. H. (2003). Social sustainability, sustainable development and housing development: The experience of Hong Kong. In R. Forrest & J. Lee (Eds.), Housing and social change: East-west perspectives (pp. 221–239). Florence, USA: Routledge.

  17. Colantonio, A. (2008). Social sustainability: A review and critique of traditional versus emerging theme and assessment method. Oxford, UK: Oxford Brookes University.

  18. Colantonio, A. (2009). Social sustainability: A review and critique of traditional versus emerging themes and assessment methods. In: M. Horner et al. (Ed.), SUE-Mot conference 2009: Second international conference on whole life urban sustainability and its assessment: Conference proceedings (p. 865). Loughborough: Loughborough University.

  19. Colantonio, A., & Dixon, T. (2011). Urban regeneration: Delivering social sustainability. Urban Regeneration & Social Sustainability: Best Practice from European Cities, 54–79.

  20. Cole, R. J. (1999). Building environmental assessment methods: Clarifying intentions. Building Research and Information,27(4/5), 230–246.

  21. Cole, R. J. (2005). Building environmental assessment methods: Redefining intentions, In Proceedings of the 2005 world sustainable building conference, Tokyo (pp. 1934–1939).

  22. Commission of the European Communities. (2001). A sustainable Europe for a better world: A European union strategy for sustainable development. Communication from the Commission (Commission’s proposal to the Gothenburg European Council). COM (2001) 264 final. http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/cnc/2001/com2001_0264en01.pdf.

  23. Cuthill, M. (2009). Strengthening the social in sustainable development: Developing a conceptual framework for social sustain-ability in a rapid urban growth region in Australia. Sustainable Development,18(6), 362–373.

  24. Davoodi, S., Fallah, H., & Aliabadi, M. (2014). Determination of affective critrions on social sustainability in architectural design. In Current trends in technology and science. 8th SAS Tech 2014 symposium on advances in science & technology-commission-IV. Iran.

  25. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2009). The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable Development,19, 289–300.

  26. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Powers, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable Development,19(5), 289–300.

  27. DETR. (2000). By design: Urban design in the planning system: Towards better practice. London: Thomas Telford.

  28. Eizenberg, E., & Jabareen, Y. (2017). Social sustainability: A new conceptual framework. Sustainability,9(1), 68.

  29. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks—Triple bottom line of 21st century business. Stoney Creek, CT: New Society Publishers.

  30. Empacher, C., & Wehling, P. (1999). Indikatoren Sozialer Nachhaltigkeit. Grundlagen und Konkretisierungen. In Institut fUr sozial-okologische Forschung (ISOE) (Ed.), ISOE Discussion Papers 13, Frankfurt am Main.

  31. Endo, J., Murakami, S., & Ikaga, T. (2007). Application of a building environmental assessment, CASBEE, and its influence on the building market. Retreived from http://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB8054.pdf on 5th of June 2017.

  32. Enyedi, G. (2002). Social sustainability of large cities. Ekistics,69(412–414), 142–144.

  33. Epstein, M. (2008). Making sustainability work: Best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental, and economic impacts. San Francisco: Greenleaf.

  34. Eurostat. (2007). Measuring progress towards a more sustainable Europe: 2007 monitoring report of the eu sustainable development strategy. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

  35. Gibberd, J. (2002). The sustainable building assessment tool, the built environment professionals conference, 1–3 May. Johannesburg.

  36. Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA). (2009a). Green star overview, certification. [Online] Available: http://www.gbca.org.au. Green Building Council of Australia. Sydney, Australia. 2009. Accessed 6 October 2017.

  37. Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA). (2009b). Green star rating tools. Web page on the GBCA Website. Updated June 16, 2009. Green Building Council of Australia. Sydney, Australia. 2009. [Online] Available: http://www.gbca.org.au/green-star/rating-tools/ August 6, 2012.

  38. GSAS. (2017). Gulf organization for research and development, GSAS technical guide 2017, Issue 2, 2017. Reteievd July, 2017, www.gord.qa/admin/Content/Link2322017121232.pdf.

  39. Harmon, J., Bucy, F., Nickbarg, S., Rao, G., & Wirtenber, J. (2009). In J. Wirtenberg, W. Russell, & D. Lipsky (Eds.), The sustainable enterprise field book, (89–115). New York: Greenleaf Publishing.

  40. Harris, J. M., Timothy, A. W., Kevin, P. G., & Neva, R. G. (Eds.). (2001). A survey of sustainable development: Social and economic dimensions (Vol. 6). Washington, DC: Island Press.

  41. Holmberg, J. (1992). Making development sustainable: Redefining institutions policy and economics. Washington, DC: Island Press.

  42. Jaeger, C., Tàbara, J. D., & Jaeger, J. (2011). European research on sustainable development: Volume 1: Transformative science approaches for sustainability (Vol. 1). Berlin: Springer.

  43. Komeily, A., & Srinivasan, R. S. (2015). A need for balanced approach to neighborhood sustainability assessments: A critical review and analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society,18, 32–43.

  44. Kopfmüller, L. et al. (2001). Nachhaltige Entwicklung Integrativ Betrachtet. Konstitutive Elemente, Regeln, Indikatoren, Edition Sigma, Berlin.

  45. Larsson, N. (2007). Rating systems and SBTool—The international initiative for a sustainable built environment. Retrieved from http://www.otago.ac.nz/law/conferences/otago036362.ppt. Accessed October 6, 2017.

  46. LEED. (2013). LEED reference guide for building design and construction 2013 edition, leadership in energy and environmental design program. Washington, USA: US Green Building Council.

  47. LEED. (2016). LEED v4 for building design and construction (pp. 1–144). Washington, USA: United State Green Building Council.

  48. Lehtonen, M. (2004). The environmental-social interface of sustainable development: Capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecological Economics,49, 199–214.

  49. Littig, B., & Grießler, E. (2004). Soziale Nachhaltigkeit. Informationen zur Umweltpolitik Nr. 160. Wien: Bundesarbeiterkammer Google Scholar.

  50. Littig, B., & Griessler, E. (2005). Social sustainability: A catchword between political pragmatism and social theory. International Journal of Sustainable Development,8(1–2), 65–79.

  51. Liu, Y., Dijst, M., Geertman, S., & Cui, C. (2017). Social sustainability in an ageing Chinese society: Towards an integrative conceptual framework. Sustainability,9(4), 658.

  52. Loh, J. (Ed.). (2000). The living planet report (p. 1). Gland, Switzerland: WWF.

  53. Lützkendorf, T., & Lorenz, D. (2005). Sustainable building investment: Valuing sustainable buildings through performance assessment. Building Research and Information,33(3), 212–234.

  54. Mckenzie, S. (2004). Social sustainability: Towards some definitions. Magil: Hawke Research Institute, University of South Australia.

  55. Murphy, K. (2012). The social pillar of sustainable development: A literature review and framework for policy analysis. Sustainability: Science, Practice & Policy,8(1), 15–29.

  56. New Zealand Green Building Council (NZGBC). (2009). Green star New Zealand web site. New Zealand Green Building Council, 2009. Auckland, New Zealand. [Online] Available: http://www.nzgbc.org.nz/main/greenstar. August 6, 2012.

  57. Nguyen, B. K., & Altan, H. (2011). Comparative review of five sustainable rating systems. In 2011 international conference on green buildings and sustainable cities, Procedia Engineering (Vol. 21, pp. 376–386).

  58. OECD. (2001). Sustainable development: Critical issues. Paris: OECD.

  59. Omann, I. & Spangenberg, J. (2002). Assessing social sustain-ability: The social dimension of sustainability in a socio-economic scenario. In Seventh biennial conference of the international society for ecological economics. March 6–9, Sousse, Tunisia.

  60. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2016). Society at a Glance 2016—OECD social indicators. http://www.oecd.org/social/society-at-a-glance-19991290.htm. October, 10 2017.

  61. Polèse, M., & Stren, R. E. (2000). The social sustainability of cities: Diversity and the management of change. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

  62. Reed, D. (1997). Review brief-structural adjustment, the environment, and sustainable development. Long Range Planning,30(1), 143–144.

  63. Sachs, I. (1999). Social sustainability and whole and whole development: Exploring the dimensions of sustainable development. London: Zed Book.

  64. Saunders, T. (2008). A discussion document comparing international environmental assessment methods for buildings. Watford, United Kingdom: BRE Global.

  65. Savitz, A., & Weber, K. (2006). The triple bottom line: How today’s best-run organizations are achieving economic, social and environmental success—And how you can too. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

  66. SBTool | International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment. (2017). Retrieved from http://www.iisbe.org/sbmethod. Accessed October 6 2017.

  67. Sharifi, A., & Murayama, A. (2013). A critical review of seven selected neighborhood sustainability assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,38, 73–87.

  68. Thin, N., Lockhart, C., & Yaron, G. (2002). Conceptualizing socially sustainable development. London: Department for International Development and World Bank.

  69. United Nations Commission for Sustainable Development (UNCSD). (1996). Indicators for sustainable development, framework and methodology. http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/indisd/english/english.htm. October, 10 2017.

  70. United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs (UNDESA). (2001). Indicators of sustainable development: Framework and methodologies. New York: United Nations.

  71. United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs (UNDESA). (2007). Indicators of sustainable development: Guidelines and methodologies. New York: United Nations.

  72. Vallance, S., Perkin, H., & Dixon, J. (2011). What is a social sustainability? A clarification of concepts Geoforume,42(3), 342–348.

  73. Vavik, T., & Keitsch, M. (2010). Exploring relationships between universal design and social sustainable development: Some methodological aspects to the debate on the sciences of sustainability. Sustainable Development,18(5), 295–305.

  74. Weingaertner, C., & Moberg, Å. (2014). Exploring social sustainability: Learning from perspectives on urban development and companies and products. Sustainable Development,22(2), 122–133.

  75. Woodcraft, S., Hackett, T., & Caistor-Arendar, L. (2011). Design for social sustainability: A framework for creating thriving new communities. Young Foundation.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Jubril Olakitan Atanda.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Atanda, J.O., Öztürk, A. Social criteria of sustainable development in relation to green building assessment tools. Environ Dev Sustain 22, 61–87 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0184-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Social criteria
  • Building assessment tools
  • Sustainable development
  • Indicators
  • Social sustainability