The Effect of Regional Priority Points on the Performance of LEED 2009 Certified Buildings in Turkey, Spain, and Italy

Pushkar, Svetlana

doi:10.3390/su10103364

Cited by 16 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To verify this LEED criticism, it is necessary to study the empirical evidence of LEED foreign certification practices. Research in this area has recently emerged ( Pushkar, 2018a , 2018b ; Wu et al., 2018 ; Pham et al., 2020 ). Pushkar (2018a) compared LEED-NCv3 2009 Gold projects certified in two pairs of northern and southern European countries, namely, Finland versus Sweden and Turkey versus Spain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating LEED commercial interior (LEED-CI) projects under the LEED transition from v3 to v4: the differences between China and the US

Pushkar

2020

Heliyon

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to assess the difference between projects from versions 3 (v3) and 4 (v4) of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Commercial Interiors (LEED-CI) rating system in China and the US at the Silver and Gold certificate levels. Non-parametric statistics are used to estimate these differences. We analyze the Sustainable Sites (SS), Location and Transportation (LT), Water Efficiency (WE), Energy and Atmosphere (EA), Materials and Resources (MR), and Indoor Environmental Quality (EQ) categories for the LEED-CI Silver and Gold projects. The results show that the WE and EA categories in v3 and the WE, EA, LT, and MR categories in v4 are implemented differently in China and the US. For the LEED-CI Silver and Gold projects, the MR and EQ categories in v3 and the EQ category in v4 show similar implementation in China and the US. The LEED-CIv3 SS category shows a different result at the Gold level but the same at the Silver level when comparing China and the US. Thus, at the Silver and Gold levels of the LEED-CI projects, v4, rather than v3, provides more opportunities to highlight the environmental priorities of China and the US.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating LEED commercial interior (LEED-CI) projects under the LEED transition from v3 to v4: the differences between China and the US

Pushkar

2020

Heliyon

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the US, 920 [10] and 1598 [11] LEED-NCv3 Silver and Gold projects, respectively, have been studied. In Turkey, Spain, and Italy, 108 LEED-CIv3 and LEED-C and S Gold projects [12] and in Finland, Sweden, Turkey, and Spain, 133 LEED-NCv3 projects [13] were evaluated. Thus, LEED-NC is the most popular system and often issued by design teams [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

LEED-CIv4 Commercial Interiors: United States (2014–2019)

Pushkar

2019

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyzes Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Interior Design and Construction: Commercial Interior (LEED-CIv4) projects, thereby presenting the first empirical evidence of these projects. The aim of the study was to reveal trends in Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum LEED-CIv4 US projects, certified in 2014-2019. The effect size between possible and achieved points in categories and credits was measured using Cliff's δ. The following conclusions were drawn: (i) the Integrative Process, Innovation, and Regional Priority categories showed high achievements only in Platinum projects, so it is necessary to reconsider these categories toward increasing their acceptance at all certification levels; (ii) the Location and Transportation and Indoor Environmental Quality categories were quite well-designed because most credits in these categories showed varying levels of achievement (low/medium/high/very high) at all four certification levels; and (iii) the Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, and Material and Resources categories were badly designed because most credits there similarly showed low achievements at all four certification levels, thus needing more attention toward their improvement in the next LEED-CI version.

show abstract

“…These studies usually use BREAM, LEED, or SBTool as a source to define scoring methodology and IDS. In particular, LEED includes a regional priority category that may bring four extra points [88], which is less than 4% of the final score. On the contrary, BREEAM seems fully adapted to some countries via cooperation agreements with local institutes, but there are only a few (see Table 1).…”

Section: Ra and Nt In Grbs Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Green Building Rating Systems and the New Framework Level(s): A Critical Review of Sustainability Certification within Europe

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing problems regarding pollution and climate change have long been demonstrated by scientific evidence. An important portion of carbon emissions are produced by the building sector. These emissions are directly related not only to the building’s energy consumption, but also other building attributes affecting the construction and operation of existing buildings: materials selection, waste management, transportation, water consumption, and others. To help reduce these emissions, several green building rating system (GBRSs) have appeared during the last years. This has made it difficult for stakeholders to identify which GBRSs could be more suitable to a specific project. The heterogeneity of the GRBS scenario requires the creation of a transparent and robust indicator framework that can be used in any country within the European Union (EU), which is a common EU framework of core sustainability indicators for office and residential buildings Level(s) with the goal to provide a solid structure for building sustainability certification across all countries of the EU. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the most common GBRSs within the EU: Building Research Establishment Assessment Method (BREEAM), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), Haute Qualité Environnementale (HQE), and Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED), and a bottom up comparison of the influence in the final score produced by the indicators stated by Level(s). The indicators studied show a different influence of Level(s) indicators on every GBRS, where LEED and BREEAM were most affected while HQE and DGNB were less so. This paper demonstrates the heterogeneity of current GRBSs in the EU scenario and the difference between sustainability assessments, where DGNB seems to be more aligned to the current EU framework. Finally, the paper concludes with the need to work to achieve alignment between the GBRS and Level(s).

show abstract

The Effect of Regional Priority Points on the Performance of LEED 2009 Certified Buildings in Turkey, Spain, and Italy

Cited by 16 publications

References 39 publications

Evaluating LEED commercial interior (LEED-CI) projects under the LEED transition from v3 to v4: the differences between China and the US

Evaluating LEED commercial interior (LEED-CI) projects under the LEED transition from v3 to v4: the differences between China and the US

LEED-CIv4 Commercial Interiors: United States (2014–2019)

Green Building Rating Systems and the New Framework Level(s): A Critical Review of Sustainability Certification within Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About