Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

BIOCENOSIS: a novel framework for sustainability assessment of built environment in the Indian context

  • Published:
Sādhanā Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It is well established that the existing building environmental assessment methods and sustainability assessment methods are intended to foster detailed design stage while there is a need to support early design stages. This research intends to develop a framework that actively supports design development at the formative design stages. The paper reviews the well-established building environmental assessment methods: CASBEE, LEED, BREEAM and GRIHA, and the existing sustainability assessment methods: iiSBE’s Sustainable Building Tool (SB Tool), German Sustainable Building Council’s Certificate Program (DGNB), Living Building Challenge (LBC) and ARUP’s Sustainable Project Assessment Routine SPeAR®. Further, well-known theories of ecological Sustainability are reviewed. The critical points of convergence and divergence of anthropocentric and biocentric approaches are identified to articulate the parameters of sustainability assessment. Specialists in the sustainable built environment assigned weights for assessment parameters (criteria) by applying the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Their specialist opinions manifest the particular features of the Indian context. The paper delineates the Biocenosis, a novel framework for sustainability assessment of the built environment rooted in the concept of the synergy of nature with social, economic, environmental and cultural benefits for the context of India. It is intended to aid building professionals in the formative design phases as it enables an integrated and comprehensive assessment of the level to which the requirement of a sustainable built environment is satisfied.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. RBI 2018 Handbook of statistics on the Indian economy. Reserve Bank of India. https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/Publications/PDFs/0HSIE_F.PDF (accessed 31 July 2019)

  2. Reed B 2006 The trajectory of environmental design. http://www.integrativedesign.net/images/Trajectory_EnvironmentallyResponsibleDesign.pdf. (accessed 31 Oct 2012)

  3. Moffatt S and Kohler N 2008 Conceptualizing the built environment as a social-ecological system. J. Build. Res. & Inf. 36: 248–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mang P and Reed W 2012 Designing from Place: A Regenerative Framework and Methodology. J. Build. Res. & Inf. 40: 23–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Saaty T L 1994 How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 24: 19–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. ASHRAE 2006 Green Guide: the Design, Construction, and Operation of Sustainable Buildings. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating & Air-conditioning Engineers Inc, Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam

  7. Gowri K 2004 Green building rating systems: an overview. ASHRAE Journal. 26: 56–58

    Google Scholar 

  8. BRE 2008 A Discussion document comparing international environmental assessment methods for buildings. Building Research Establishment. J. Build. Res. & Inf. 36: 248–268

    Google Scholar 

  9. Robinson J B 2004 Squaring the Circle? Some Thoughts on the Idea of Sustainable Development. Ecological Economics. 48: 369–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. BRE 2016 BRE Environmental Assessment Method, Building Research Establishment. Homepage [Online]. The UK. Available: https://www.breeam.com/BREEAMInt2016SchemeDocument/#resources/output/10_pdf/a4_pdf/nc_pdf_printing/sd233_nc_int_2016_print.pdf (accessed March 2019)

  11. Horvat M and Fazio P 2005 Comparative Review of Existing CertificationPrograms and Performance Assessment Tools for Residential Buildings. Architectural Science Review. 48: 69–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. GBCI 2018 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). Green Business Certification Inc. USA. https://www.usgbc.org/help/what-leed

  13. JSBC 2014 Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE) Japan Sustainable Building Consortium, Japan. http://www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/index.htm

  14. GRIHA Council 2021 Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment, 2019, GRIHA Council and The Energy Resources Institute. https://www.grihaindia.org/sites/default/files/pdf/Manuals/griha-manual-vol1.pdf

  15. ILFI 2010 Living building challenge version 3.1. International Living Future Institute, Seattle, WA. https://living-future.org/lbc/

  16. IISBE 2016 SBTool, International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment. https://www.iisbe.org/system/files/private/SBTool%202016%20description%2021Jul16.pdf

  17. ARUP Sustainable Project Assessment Routine (SPeAR®). https://www.arup.com/projects/spear

  18. DGNB The DGNB System, The German Sustainable Building Council. https://www.dgnb-system.de/en/system/index.php

  19. Leopold A 1949 A Sand County Almanac. The Oxford University Press

  20. McHarg I L 1992 Design with nature. John Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  21. Wells M 1982 A Regeneration-Based Checklist for Design and Construction. Gentle Architecture, McGraw-Hill

  22. Todd N and Todd J 1984 Bioshelters, Ocean Arks, City Farming: Ecology as the basis of design. Sierra club books San Francisco

  23. McDonough W 2005 The Wisdom of Designing Cradle to Cradle. https://www.TED.com

  24. Vale B and Vale R 1991 Green Architecture: Design for a Sustainable Future. Thames and Hudson, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Lyle J T 1994 Regenerative Design for Sustainable development. John Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. Van der Ryn S and Cowan S 1996 Ecological design. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  27. McDonough W 2002 Buildings like trees, cities like forests. The Catalogue of the Future, Pearson Press

  28. Kellert S 2004 Beyond LEED: From low environmental impact to restorative environmental design. Keynote address Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities conference, Sponsored by Green Roofs for Healthy Cities, Toronto, CA and City of Portland, Portland: OR, 4 June

  29. Reed B 2007a A livings systems approach to design. AIA National Convention May– Theme Keynote Address

  30. BIS 2016 National Building Code of India. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

  31. BEE 2017 Energy Conservation Building Code. Bureau of Energy Efficiency, New Delhi

  32. ISO 2011 ISO/CD 21929–1 Sustainability in building construction: Sustainability indicators—Part 1: Framework for the development of indicators and a core set of indicators for buildings. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  33. McDonough W and Braungart M 2002 Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the way we make things. North Point Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  34. Birkeland J ed 2002 Design for Sustainability: A sourcebook of integrated, ecological solution. Earthscan

  35. Reed B 2007 Shifting from “sustainability” to regeneration. J. Build. Res. & Inf. 35: 674–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Couchman A 2007 Environmentally Restorative Architecture: Designing buildings for the 21st century. 2nd International Conference on Sustainability Engineering and Science. Auckland, New Zealand

  37. Benyus J 1997 Biomimicry – Innovation inspired by nature. Harper Collins Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. Zari M P 2008 Bioinspired architectural design to adapt to climate change. World Sustainable Building Conference. SB08. Melbourne, Australia

  39. Zari M P and Storey J B 2007 An ecosystem based biomimetic theory for a regenerative built environment. Lisbon Sustainable Building Conference. Lisbon, Portugal

  40. Graham P 2003 Building Ecology: First Principles for a Sustainable Built Environment. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kibert C J, Sendzimir J and Guy G B 2002 Construction Ecology. Spon Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  42. Van Der Ryn S and Pena R 2002 Ecologic analogues and architecture. In C. J. Kibert, J. Sendzimir, G. B. Guy (eds), Construction Ecology. Spon Press, London

  43. Natural Logic Inc. 2003 Brattleboro Food Co-op: Preparing the ground for a regenerative market and marketplace: preliminary report prepared for the Brattleboro Food Co-op. Unpublished

  44. Cole R J, Charest S and Schroeder S 2006 Beyond Green: Drawing on nature (for the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada's "Beyond Green: Adaptive, Restorative and Regenerative Design" course – SDCB 305). The University of British Columbia

  45. UNCED 1992 The Global Partnership for Environment and Development: A guide to Agenda 21 (Ch 10). United Nations Publication, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  46. Jenkin S and Zari M P 2009 Rethinking our built environments: towards a sustainable future, a research document. Ministry for the Environment, New Zealand Government

  47. Holmstedt L, Brandt N and Robèrt K H 2017 Can Stockholm Royal Seaport be part of the puzzle towards global sustainability?-from local to global Sustainability using the same set of criteria. J. Clean Prod. 140: 72–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Abdul-Rahman H, Wang C and Ebrahimi M 2016 Integrating and ranking sustainability criteria for housing. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Eng. Sustain. 169: 3–30

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ali H H and Al Nsairat S F 2009 Developing a green building assessment tool for developing countries a case of Jordan. J. Build. Environ. 44: 1053–1064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Bakar A H A and Cheen K S 2011 sustainable housing practices in Malaysian housing development: Towards establishing sustainability index. IJ Tech. 1: 84–93

    Google Scholar 

  51. Turcu C 2013 Re-thinking sustainability indicators: Local perspectives of urban Sustainability. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 56: 695–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Mulliner E, Smallbone K and Maliene V 2013 An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method. Omega 41: 270–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Chandratilake S R and Dias W P S 2013 Sustainability rating systems for buildings: comparisons and correlations. Energy 59: 22–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Alyami S H, Rezgui Y and Kwan A 2013 Developing sustainable building assessment scheme for Saudi Arabia: Delphi consultation approach. Renew. Sustain Energy Rev. 27: 43–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Mateus R and Bragança L 2011 Sustainability assessment and rating of buildings: Developing the methodology SBToolPT–H. J. Build. Environ. 46: 1962–1971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Braganca L, Mateus R and Koukkari H 2010 Building sustainability assessment. Sustainability 2: 2010–2023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Nilashi M, Zakaria R, Ibrahim O, Majid M Z A, Zin R M, Chugtai M W, Abidin N I Z, Sahamir S R and Yakubu D A 2015 A knowledge-based expert system for assessing the performance level of green buildings. Knowledge Based System 86: 194–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Burdova E K and Vilcekova S 2015 Sustainable building assessment tool in Slovakia. Energy Procedia 78: 1829–1834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Alwaer H and Clements-Croome D J 2010 Key performance indicators (KPIs) and priority setting in using the multi-attribute approach for assessing sustainable intelligent buildings. J. Build. Environ. 45: 799–807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Yu W, Li B, Yang X and Wang Q 2015 A development of a rating method and weighting system for green store buildings in China. Renewable Energy 73: 123–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. LNTPA Lithunian Real Estate Developers Association, available online http://lntpa.lt/darnios-pletros-akademija/konkursai-uz-darnia-pletra-ir-darni-aplinka/

  62. Shen L Y, Tam V W Y, Tam L and Ji Y 2010 Project feasibility study: The key to successful implementation of sustainable and socially responsible construction management practices. J. Clean. Prod. 18: 254–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Pearce A R, Hastak M and Vanegas J A 2012 A decision support system for construction materials selection using Sustainability as a criterion. In: Proc. of 2012 Symp. on simulation for Architecture and Urban Design (Sim AUD'12), Society for Computer Simulation International, San Diego, CA, USA, 28-31, October. 1-5

  64. Wallbaum H, Ostermeyer Y, Salzer C and Zea E 2012 Escamilla, Indicator based sustainability assessment tool for affordable housing construction technologies. Eco. Indic. 18: 353–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Kang H, Lee Y and Kim S 2016 Sustainable building assessment tool for project decision makers and its development process. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 58: 34–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Ceron-Palma I, Sanye-Mengual E, Oliver-Sola J, Montero J, Ponce-Caballero C and Rieradevall J 2013 Towards a green sustainable strategy for social neighbourhood in Latin America: Case from social housing in Merida, Yucatan, Mexico. Habitat Int. 38: 47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Lai A C K, Mui K W, Wong L T and Law L Y 2009 An evaluation model for indoor environmental quality (IEQ) acceptance in residential buildings. Energy Build. 41: 930–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zavadskas E K, Cavallaro F, Podvezko V, Ubarte I and Kaklauskas A 2017 MCDM assessment of a healthy and safe built environment according to sustainable development principles: A practical neighbourhood approach in Vilnius. Sustainability 9: 702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Higham A and Stephenson P 2014 Identifying project success criteria for UK social housing asset management schemes. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual ARCOM Conference, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Portsmouth, UK, 1–3 September. 33–42

  70. Zavrl M S, Zarnic R and Selih J 2009 Multicriteria sustainability assessment of residential buildings. Technol. Econ. Dev. Eco. 15: 612–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Lee W L and Burnett J 2006 Customization of GBTool in Hong Kong. Building and Environment 41: 1831–1846

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Chew M Y L and Das S 2008 Building Grading Systems: A Review of the State-of-the-Art. Architectural Science Review 51: 3–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Berardi U 2012 Sustainability Assessment in the Construction Sector: Rating Systems and Related Buildings. Sustainable Development 20: 411–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Wong S C and Abe N 2014 Stakeholders’ perspectives of a building environmental assessment method: The case of CASBEE. Building and Environment 82: 502–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Markelj J, Kuzman M K, Grošelj P and Senegačnik M Z 2014 A simplified method for evaluating building sustainability in the early design phase for architects. Sustainability 6: 8775–8795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. BMSG 2017 https://bpmsg.com/academic/ahp.php

  77. Bhatt R, Macwan J E M, Bhatt D and Patel V 2010 Analytic hierarchy process approach for criteria rankings of sustainable building assessment: A case study. World Applied Sciences Journal 8: 881–888

    Google Scholar 

  78. VYAS G S and Jha K N, 2019 Development of Green Building Rating System Using AHP and Fuzzy Integrals: A Case of India. Journal of Architectural Engineering. 25: 04019004–04019009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Lazar N and Chithra K 2022 Green Building Rating Systems from the prospect of sustainability dimensions through the building life-cycle Local and global priority weight for dimensions and categories. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 29: 1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Rural Development and Technology, India Institute of Technology, Hauz Khas, New Delhi, India

    PARVESH KUMAR & VIJAYRAGHAVAN CHARIAR

  2. Department of Architecture, School of Planning and Architecture, I P Estate, New Delhi, India

    CHITRAREKHA KABRE

Authors
  1. PARVESH KUMAR
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. VIJAYRAGHAVAN CHARIAR
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. CHITRAREKHA KABRE
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to PARVESH KUMAR.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

KUMAR, P., CHARIAR, V. & KABRE, C. BIOCENOSIS: a novel framework for sustainability assessment of built environment in the Indian context. Sādhanā 48, 12 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-022-02062-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-022-02062-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation