Sustainable Built Environments

2013 Edition
| Editors: Vivian Loftness, Dagmar Haase

Rating Systems for Sustainability

Reference work entry

Definition of the Subject

Voluntary building environmental assessment methods have emerged as a legitimate means to evaluate the performance of buildings across a broad range of environmental considerations – most typically resource use, ecological loadings, and indoor environmental quality. An underlying premise of these voluntary assessments is that if the market is provided with improved information and mechanisms, a discerning client group can and will provide leadership in environmental responsibility, and that others will follow suit to remain competitive.

The increase in development and application of building environmental assessment methods over the past 20 years has provided considerable theoretical and practical experience on their contribution in furthering environmentally responsible building practices. An important indirect benefit is that the broad range of issues incorporated in environmental assessments require greater communication and interaction between members of...

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



In addition to the specific references, the content of this article draws on following previous published works:

Cole RJ (2005) Building Environmental Assessment Methods: Redefining Intentions and Roles, Building Research & Information, 35:5, pp 455–467

Cole RJ (2006) The Coexistence of Building Environmental Assessment Methods in Common Markets, Building Research & Information, 34:4, pp 357–371

Cole RJ (2009) Chapter 18: Environmental Assessment: Shifting Scales, IN: Designing High-Density Cities for Social & Environmental Sustainability, Ed: Edward Ng, Earthscan Press, pp 273–282

Cole RJ (2010) Building Environmental Assessment in a Global Market, International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development, 1:1, pp 11–14


  1. 1.
    Baldwin R, Leach SJ, Doggart J, Attenborough M (1990) BREEAM version 1/90: an environmental assessment for new office designs. Building Research Establishment, GarstonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gann DM, Salter AJ, Whyte JK (2003) The design quality indicator as a tool for thinking. Build Res Inform 31(5):318–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    CASBEE, Comprehensive assessment system for building environmental efficiency, Japan Sustainable Building Consortium CorpsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leadership in energy and environmental design (LEED) Green building rating System, US green building councilGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cole RJ (2005) Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and roles. Build Res Inform 35(5):455–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Robinson J (2004) Squaring the circle? some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecol Econ 48:369–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaatz E, Root D, Bowen P (2004) Implementing a participatory approach in a sustainability building assessment tool. In: Proceedings of the sustainable building Africa 2004 conference, Stellenbosch, South Africa (CD Rom, Paper No. 001), 13–18 Sept 2004Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    LBC (2010) Living building challenge version 2.0. International Living Building Institute, Seattle, WAGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sustainable Project Assessment Routine (SPeAR®)
  10. 10.
    iiSBE (International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment) (2010) Sustainable building tool.
  11. 11.
    Gibberd J (2001) The sustainable building assessment tool – assessing how buildings can support sustainability in developing countries. Continental shift 2001 – IFI international conference, Johannesburg, South Africa, 11–14 Sept 2001Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gibberd J (2005) Paper 04–001, Assessing sustainable buildings in developing countries – The Sustainable Building Assessment Tool (SBAT) and The Sustainable Building Lifecycle (SBL). The 2005 world sustainable building conference, Tokyo 2729 Sept 2005Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    German Sustainable Building Council’s Certificate Program.
  14. 14.
    Gibberd J (2001) The opinion of Gibberd. Sustain Build (3):41Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cole RJ (1999) Building environmental assessment methods: clarifying intentions. Build Res Inform 27(4/5):230–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Code for sustainable homes: a step-change in sustainable home building practice.
  18. 18.
    ASHRAE/USGBC/IES, Standard 189.1-2009, Standard for the design of high-performance green buildings (Except low-rise residential buildings), American society of heating, Ventilation and air conditioning engineers, Atlanta, GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    2030 Challenge, The 2030 Challenge was issued by Architecture 2030, a non-profit organization.
  20. 20.
    Jarvis IA (2009) Closing the loops – how real building performance data drives continuous improvement. Intell Build Int 1(4):269–276Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lorenz D, Lützkendorf T (2008a) Sustainability in property valuation – theory and practice. J Property Investment Finance 26(6):482–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sayce S, Sundberg A, Mohd A (2009) Sustainable property: a premium product? A working paper, Paper presented at ERES Conference 2009, Stockholm, 24–27 June 2009Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kats, Gregory (2003b) The costs and financial benefits of green building: a report to california’s sustainable building task force. California: Capital E. October.
  24. 24.
    Matthiessen Lisa F, Peter M (2004) Costing green: a comprehensive cost database and budgeting methodology. Davis Langdon Adamson, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    CASBEE for property appraisal, Japan Sustainable Building Consortium Corps. December 2009Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    LEnSE (Methodology Development towards a Label for Environmental, Social and Economic Buildings) (2006). Stepping Stone’s 1,2 & 3,” LEnSE Partners, November 2006Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    ISO CD 21931, Framework for methods for assessment of environmental performance of construction works – Part 1 – Buildings, international organization for standardization, standard under development ISO TG59/SC17: sustainability in building constructionGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Visier JC (2009) Common metrics for key issues. SB alliance annual conference Paris, 5 Nov 2009Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sustainable Building Alliance.
  30. 30.
    International Sustainability Alliance.
  31. 31.
    Green Building Councils. Country based members of the World Green Building Council – either established members, emerging members or prospective membersGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    World Green Building Council founded in (1999)
  33. 33.
    Julien A (2009) Assessing the assessor: BREEAM VS LEED. Sustain Mag 9(6):30–33Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Online (2009) BREEAM V LEED, Onoffice Magazine, May 2009Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Doggart J, Baldwin DR (1997) BREEAM international: regional similarities and differences of an international strategy for environmental assessment of buildings. In: Proceedings second international conference: buildings and the environment, Paris, pp 83–90Google Scholar
  36. 36.
  37. 37.
    BRE Global (2009) BREEAM – The environmental system for buildings around the worldGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
    Numbers of LEED Accredited Professionals worldwide.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Architecture & Landscape ArchitectureUniversity of BCVancouverCanada