Comparative analysis of certification systems in urban construction
https://doi.org/10.31675/1607-1859-2022-24-6-91-102
Abstract
The development concept was accepted early in the 1990s, and since then it was developed in most scientific and industrial sectors. Since the advent of this concept, various definitions were proposed and various methods were applied to implement this concept. The urban development is currently considered at the level of the overall strategy and urban planning criteria, which meet the objectives of this approach. Certification system is of high importance at the interstate level, but it plays even a greater role in the social development. As a rule, certification is used to evaluate the development of individual buildings and other urban facilities. The importance of goals and objectives solved by the certification system actualizes the elaboration of measures aimed at adapting and progressive development of the designated system to the needs of modern urban construction. The paper deals with topical issues of certification and certification systems in the field of urban planning such as DGNB, LEED, BREEAM, HQE, Green Star and CASBEE. A comparative analysis of certification systems is also carried out. In conclusion, the results of the analysis of these systems are presented as well as their advantages and disadvantages. The result of this assessment can be useful for national and local authorities, urbanists, planners, builders, investors. It should be added that none of the considered certification systems is universal, each of them has both advantages and disadvantages. It can be concluded that the use of certification systems in urban construction contributes to the settlement development. Originality: Comparison of six major global standards, their urban certification systems, evaluation criteria, and comparison with the main development aspects (economic, environmental and social).
Keywords
development,
certification system,
urban construction,
assessment system,
DGNB,
LEED,
BREEAM,
HQE,
Green Star,
CASBEE
About the Author
M. M. Kashiripoor
Belarusian National Technical University
Belarus
Belarus
Mohammad M. Kashiripoor, PhD, A/Professor
150, Nezavisimosti Ave., 220013, Minsk
References
1. Coplák J., Rakšányi P. Planning sustainable settlements. Slovakia, Bratislava: Slovak University of Technology, 2003. 112 p.
2. Shen L.Y., Ochoa J.J., Shah M.N., Zhang X. The application of urban sustainability indicators – A comparison between various practices. Habitat international. 2011. V. 35(1). Pp. 17−29.
3. The DAC guidelines: Strategies for sustainable development. Paris: Organization for economic co-operation and development, 2001. 382 p.
4. Reed R., Bilos A., Wilkinson S., Schulte K.W. International comparison of sustainable rating tools. Journal of Sustainable Real Estate. 2009. V. 1 (1). Pp. 1−22.
5. Kashiripoor M.M. Sovershenstvovanie arkhitekturno-planirovochnoi struktury malykh gorodov regiona Blizhnego Vostoka na osnove kontseptsii ustoichivogo razvitiya: dissertatsiya na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni kandidata arkhitektury [Improvement of architectural and planning structure of small towns in the Middle East region based on development concept. PhD Thesis]. Minsk, 2017. 186 p. (rus)
6. Kashiripoor M.M. Metodologicheskie osnovy i kriterii otsenki arkhitekturno-planirovochnoi struktury malykh gorodov Irana s uchetom trebovanii ustoichivogo razvitiya [Methodological basics and evaluation criteria for urban structure and architecture of Iranian small city within sustainable development framework]. Minsk: Arkhitektura, 2016. V. 9. Pp. 138−142. (rus)
7. BREEAM communities assessor manual development planning application stage SD5065B. Technical Manual. BRE Global Ltd, 2009. 184 p.
8. LEED for neighborhood development a prescription for green healthy communities. Council, U.G.B. Available: www.greenhomeguide.org/livinggreen/led_for_neighborhood_development.html. (accessed March 15, 2009).
9. Kyvelou S., Baer I., Sinou M., Papadopoulos T. Developing a south-European eco-quarter design and assessment tool based on the concept of territorial capital. INTECH Open Access Publisher. 2012. Pp. 561−588.
10. Fowler K.M., Rauch E.M. Sustainable building rating systems summary. United States, Richland: Pacific Northwest National Lab., 2006. 55 p.
11. DGNB Certification System. Munich: German Sustainable Building Council, 2008. 263 p.
12. Green Star. Communities. Australia: Green Building Council of Australia, 2017. 40 p.
13. CASBEE-City, Technical Manual. Japan Sustainable Building Consortium, The committee for the development of an environmental performance assessment tools for cities, 2012. 63 p.
14. Haapio A. Towards sustainable urban communities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2012. V. 32. No. 1. Pp. 165−169.
15. Sharifi A., Murayama A. A critical review of seven selected neighborhood sustainability assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2013. V. 38. Pp. 73−87.
16. Kashiripoor M.M. Reitingovye sistemy otsenki ustoichivosti v gradostroitel'stve [Rating systems in urban design]. Minsk: Arkhitektura, 2019. V. 12. Pp. 64−69. (rus)
Review
For citations:
Kashiripoor M.M. Comparative analysis of certification systems in urban construction. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo arkhitekturno-stroitel'nogo universiteta. JOURNAL of Construction and Architecture. 2022;24(6):91-102. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31675/1607-1859-2022-24-6-91-102
Views:
579
Email this article 