Land Management Criteria for Green Building Certification Systems in Turkey

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-63564/v2

Download PDF

Research Article

Land Management Criteria for Green Building Certification Systems in Turkey

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-63564/v2

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

The energy issue is of great importance for energy dependent countries like Turkey. Some legislative regulations such as the Energy Efficiency Law and the Energy Performance Regulation of Building have recently been made in our country. Although the Energy Performance Certificate for buildings has been put into practice, a national green building certification system is not available yet. Worldwide valid certification systems and parts of the certification systems regarding land management that are tried to be established in Turkey were examined to determine the survey questions and in line with this, a literature review was performed. The experts in Turkey were interviewed to gather ideas and insights. By listing the answers from these experts using the AHP method, the criteria and sub-criteria of land method were determined. In this study, a green building certification system to be established in our country was discussed under the category of land management to which great importance has been attached, especially by survey engineers, and the criteria under this category has been identified. A survey was conducted to determine these criteria, and the results were examined. The subcriteria of the category of land management were identified, and their weights were calculated.

Energy

Sustainability

Green Building

Green Building Certification Systems

In Europe, in the 18th and 19th centuries, new inventions such as steam-powered machines gave the industry the ability to feed more people from the same amount of land and led to population growth cities and increased job opportunities across different industrial sectors.

Efforts to transform the destruction caused by the Second World War into recovery and growth have been the root cause of uncontrolled expansion. This uncontrolled expansion has also created a waste problem. While these waste accumulations did not create problems in society before, they have grown over time and have reached a level that now threatens the entire world ecosystem.

With the technological development in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, information and communication infrastructure has spread to wide geographical areas. The fact that data and information access have become independent from time and space through mobile communication technologies has revealed the extent to which human beings have destroyed the ecosystem. This unfortunate development has mobilized Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) on issues such as air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution, and radioactive pollution, and world leaders have made agreements such as the Montreal Protocol, Kyoto Protocol, and Stockholm Convention to raise awareness and develop jointly agreed solutions. Today, environmental sensitivity has increased and eco-friendly ecological buildings called “green buildings” have emerged in the building industry. Green buildings are shaped by designs that aim to use less energy and water and reduce the impact of the materials used on environmental life-cycle. Green buildings have undoubtedly been a critical part of the response to the challenges posed by global warming and climate change reaching a critical level. However, the benefits provided by green buildings need to be controlled by a mechanism, and therefore the need for certification systems, which is the focus of this article.

Green buildings are no longer a luxury but a necessity because of their impact on human health and the wider environment. As green buildings need to meet certain standards to provide benefits in environmental, social, and economic terms, systems of certification systems have emerged to verify whether certain buildings meet green credentials. Green building qualifications are codified as the basis for green building certification programs, with environmental issues divided into appropriate categories (Hou and Wu 2021, Sartori et al 2021). Certification systems control the parameters in the construction process starting from the design phase of the buildings, and determine the green rate for the buildings by determining scores for each parameter. Different countries use different certification systems. Many green building rating systems or instruments (GBRS) have been developed accordingly to evaluate and certify green buildings. The most widely used certification systems are BREEAM in the UK, LEED in the USA, CASBEE in Japan, and Green Star Certification system in Australia (Olubunmi et al 2016, Shan and Hwang 2018, He at al 2018). Countries that do not have their own certification system take the certification systems of other countries and adapt them.

Problems such as global warming, depletion of natural resources and climate change have put countries in a difficult situation of having to address multiple challenges. In this context, green buildings that produce their own energy, have wastewater management, are sustainable, comfortable, and efficient buildings have gained further prominence. Many countries use different green building certification systems to evaluate green buildings. Yet there is no national certification system in Turkey. Therefore, buildings are evaluated using foreign certification systems, and this does not always produce context-relevant results for Turkey. In this regard, it has become crucial to a create a national certification system for Turkey.

This paper aims to fill the research gap by answering the following research questions:

What are the advantages of green building technology?
How effective is land selection in green buildings?
What should be the criteria to be considered while choosing the land in the areas where green buildings will be built?
How effective are regional changes in the green building certification system?

The aim of this study is to identify the criteria under the title ‘land management’, being one of the most important sub-criteria of green building certification systems, which has a crucial importance across multiple certification systems in foreign jurisdictions and started to gain importance in Turkey. The study also aims to determine the weights of these criteria.

Land management is defined as the decision-making process of existing land management policies supporting the increasing population with the efficient use of resources, protecting the environment, creating livable settlements by developing social and technical infrastructure areas, protecting drainage basins and wetlands, providing transportation similar to the economic incomes of the immovable property market, and supporting state services supplied with taxes and fees (Dale and Mclaughlin 1988, Ülger 2010).

One of the most important issues in green building projects is land selection. Operations such as land use, planning, evaluation, preparation of zoning plans, land and estate arrangements are important stages of the project. In studies conducted in many parts of the world, studies such as the use of materials for green building projects, utilization of renewable energy systems, management of waste materials have been performed, but not much attention has been paid to land management. This study discusses the title ‘land management’ and proposes a potential land management certification system to be created for Turkey. Sub-criteria for the prosed certification system are also identified, and the weights of these criteria are to be determined after the survey. Additionally, the benefits of green buildings and green building certification systems for both the economy and the people are set out and the necessity of establishing a national certification system is re-emphasized.

Sustainability

Our world has existed in a balance of cycles decorated with incredible details for billions of years. Some of these equilibrium states have declined to alarming levels over the past 30 years. As a result, this situation causes visible climatic changes, seasonal changes and therefore the deterioration of nature. Global greenhouse gas emissions have caused a number of problems, global warming and energy supply shortages, thus leading to increased awareness around the world for green and sustainable development. As a result, this worrying situation has led to the popularity of the concept of sustainability, which academics and scientists from almost all fields have been working on and seeking solutions for several decades (Kaya 2021, Costanza and Patten 1995, Ignatius et al 2016, Jorgenson et al 2019, Shafique et al 2018).

While the population of people living in urban settings constituted 10% of the total world population just after the Industrial Revolution in the early 19th century, it is over 50% today. The increase in migration from villages to cities and the ensuing rapid, inadequate, and substandard structures caused by this migration have unfortunately caused many environmental problems. These problems, such as the decrease in natural energy sources, the degradation of the ecological balance, and particularly global warming (which stands out especially with recent various natural disasters), and environmental pollution have become current issues in many countries around the world and present the biggest problems of a constantly and rapidly changing world. The UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction has recently concluded that cities are becoming increasingly vulnerable to drought, floods, thermal stress, extreme precipitation events and other natural disasters (McPhillips et al 2018).

Due to the growth in the world population and industrialization along with technological advancement and globalization, the need for natural resources and energy has increased, and that brought along the demand for renewable energy resources. In this context, in order to deliver a more livable and healthier world to future generations, the world has started to prioritize the concept of sustainability (Saka 2011).

Sustainability is an environmentalist world view that argues that regional development should be realized by protecting balance of nature, and that environmental values and natural resources should not be used extravagantly but through more rational methods that consider the benefits to present and future generations while also aiming to ensure economic development (Keleş 1998).

In another respect, sustainability is perceived mainly as the ability to sustain the functions, processes, and productivity of ecological systems and ecology in the future (Pamuk and Kuruoğlu 2016).

Sustainability ensures social and intergenerational equality as well as enhancing the quality of life and economic efficiency. It maintains and increases environmental quality, combines disaster elasticity and impact reduction conceptions, and exhibit a participatory and reconciliatory approach in the decision- making process (Akgül 2010, Mileti 1999). In terms of environmental dimension, it inspires the protection of ecology and the environment. Socially it focuses on human needs and comfort, while economically it promotes the efficient use of monetary resources and strives for long-term benefits (Komeily and Srinivasan 2015, Lazar and Chithra 2021).

Taking into account the concept of energy consumption, which has been a necessity since the beginning of humanity, with the concept of sustainability, will provide more sensitivity in the context of protecting energy resources, using them efficiently, and considering the needs of future generations (Yılmaz, 2019).

The concept of sustainability has become an often-discussed concept and today is used along with many related jargons such as sustainable cities, sustainable architecture, the sustainability of wetlands, and sustainable agriculture.

Green Buildings

The continuous urbanization process of developing countries and the development of the building construction industry around the world have led to an increase in global energy consumption and thus the deterioration of the natural balance. This situation has increased the interest of the public and sustainable and healthy development has become even more important (Cordero et al 2019, Li et al 2019a, Berardi 2017). The vital crisis that plays an important role in disruption of all these balances known as global warming is mainly due to the excessive increase in the amount of CO2 gas in nature. While the production processes are directly effective in the formation of this gas, the amounts released in the energy production used in these production processes should also be taken into account indirectly. Looking at the situation from both sides, the construction sector alone has the largest share in global energy use with %36 and global CO2 gas emissions with %39 (He et al 2018, URL-1, Sartori et al 2021, Doan et al 2017). The construction industry is the main consumer of natural resources. It is the source of many problems in terms of environmental and ecological stability (Thakur et al 2018, Shan et al 2020). This situation has made green buildings one of the main models of the construction industry (Wang et al 2021, Liao and Li 2022).

Green buildings emerged out of a global response that resulted from the increasing carbon footprint of people due to global climate change (URL-1). Green buildings, which are high-tech immovables that are sensitive to the effects of buildings on the environment and human health, are those that utilize waste water, renewable energy sources, daylight, have effective heat insulation, and produce the energy needed to sustain themselves. For green buildings to be successful, the location (orientation), design, material selection, construction, operation, maintenance, transportation and reuse of buildings should be considered carefully (Yudelson 2008).

According to WorldGBC, a green building is a building that products positive impacts throughout the entire lifecycle of design, construction and operation, while reducing negative impacts on the climate and natural environment (URL-2). Recently, the ecological environment has become more important to people. Buildings increasingly incorporate environmental protection and sustainability (Meng et al 2021). In addition to green buildings providing the integration of people with nature, they also are built to protect the health of the people living in them, to increase the productivity of workers, to use natural resources efficiently, and to minimize environmental damage. In order to achieve the above-mentioned objectives, renewable energy sources such as solar and wind energy need to be used so that buildings can generate their own energy. Additionally, buildings should be designed to benefit from daylight as much as possible and they should have an effective heat insulation. An efficient solid waste management system also needs to be created, alongside use of local materials and the need to obtain an environment-friendly appearance (URL-3). Green building not only focuses on energy saving and emission reduction performance, such as increasing energy and water efficiency, improving indoor air quality and reducing environmental pollution, but also focuses on economic and social sustainable development. The green building industry has played very important role in the green development of the global economy while attracting the attention of the government and experts (Wang et al 2021, Chan et al 2017, Lopez-Behar et al 2019, Shen et al 2017). To improve the sustainability of the construction industry, green buildings have been recognized as a valid and correct step. It has also been widely accepted by governments (Shen et al 2017, Li et al 2021). Governments around the world have initiated a series of policies to promote the development of green buildings throughout society (Meng et al 2021, Shan et al 2020). Research shows that the interest and importance in green buildings has increased rapidly in many countries and some developed countries such as the USA, England, Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia and Italy have taken important steps in this regard (Darko and Chan 2016, Rajabi et al 2021).

Even though green building, high performance building or sustainable building may seem to mean the same thing, they don’t quite mean the same thing. They are sharply different from each other. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate these subtle differences. The concept of sustainable building is more comprehensive than any other. On the other hand, every model defined except sustainable structure has focused on different points. In general, the energetic quality of the building is handled by all concepts. The green building concept cares about the health and comfort of the users and the use of natural resources during the construction process. High-performance building focuses on the performative aspects of structures such as thermal, acoustics and lighting, which directly affects the health, comfort and productivity of users. Finally, sustainable building constitutes the most comprehensive concept, incorporating the environmental, economic and social dimensions of sustainable development (Kaya 2021).

While green buildings create healthy and comfortable buildings for people, they have to be shaped according to the needs of countries. Since the growth levels and geographical conditions of the countries are different, they are designed by considering each country's priorities (Işıldar and Gökbayrak 2018). For example, green buildings in China are designed to reduce pollution throughout the entire life cycle as the main importance, while maintaining resources such as energy, soil, water, and materials (Ding et al 2018). Especially in recent years, increasing air pollution and global warming have led to a rapid increase in green building construction. For example, in 2015, worldwide a total of 16 national or regional overtemperature records were broken, including in Venezuela, Germany, Hong Kong, and Indonesia (URL-4, Houghton and Castillo-Salgado 2020). In the same year, 3,275 people died in France due to heatwaves, while this number was recorded as 2,248 in India (URL-5). This led to the conclusion that the world serious steps must be taken, and the importance of green building has increased further.

Green buildings are costly to maintain from construction to demolition and most of costs lie in the design and construction stages (Olubunmi et al, 2016). The design for new buildings should be optimized to realize green buildings. The design process can be complex and involve many design variables as well as multiple and conflicting objectives in terms of lifecycle costs, energy consumption and user satisfaction (Zhang et al 2019). Despite these green buildings provide many environmental, economic, and social benefits. Some of the main benefits of green buildings are as follows (Kubba 2010, URL-6):

Protect the ecosystem,
Increase efficiency,
Reduce the emitting of carbon dioxide caused by buildings,
Minimize the environmental damage that occurs during the construction phase,
Reduce operating expenses,
Ensure the use and development of renewable energy,
Utilize waste produced by excavation,
Collect and use rain water through green roof application,
Benefit from natural light,
Economize energy consumption,
Reduce heating and cooling costs with insulation systems,
Increase the value of the building,
Offer users a healthier and more efficient environment, and
Add value to urban living spaces.

Green Building Certification Systems

Recently, the effect of implementing an application that addresses all pillars has come to the fore in order to implement sustainability in a healthy way and achieve successful results (Ameen et al 2015).

Conceptualizing the powerful impact of change and transformation on the sustainability of the world, construction industry leaders have launched different initiatives such as building code changes and Green Building Councils. GBCs, whose aim is to motivate sector stakeholders to produce buildings with higher performance than required by regulations, played an active role in the emergence and dissemination of green building certification systems in this pursuit (Ade and Rehm 2019a).

GBCCs, which started to emerge around the world from the beginning of the 90s, were adopted by the construction industry in a short time. As a result, this situation has not escaped the attention of researchers in all fields and has become an important topic. For this reason, the rapidly increasing researches of academicians from various disciplines on GBCC have focused especially in the last 10 years (Darko and Chan 2016, Lazar and Chithra 2020, Li et al 2017, Doan et al 2017).

Certificate systems have been developed to measure the sustainability level of green buildings and to provide the best application experience at the highest certification level. In line with the criteria given, the design, construction, and operation of sustainable buildings are supposed to be certified. The most commonly used criteria are sustainable development, human and environmental health, water saving, material selection, quality of indoor life, social status, and economic quality for the whole building by determining either a sustainable building approach such as ability to achieve energy efficiency or the performance of the building at key points (Bauer et al 2010). Green building certification systems have been designed to provide a framework for building design and building construction where performance targets are met for land use by building employees and other users, energy and water efficiency, indoor quality of life, and other factors. A green building certification system is a relatively more recent and distinct concept than building standards (National Research Council of The National Academies 2013). It includes the following:

Creates a verifiable method and framework to help employees make design, construction, restoration, and business management more sustainable,
Certifies a design or business in line with performance goals,
Certifies design and operating results and strategies used in constructing a building.

There are many GBCC in use today. The pioneer of these systems with a history of 30 years is the BREEAM certification tool introduced by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) in 1990 (Ade and Rehm 2019b). Apart from BREEAM in the United Kingdom and LEED in the United States, the most prominent green building certification systems in the world include Canada’s SBTOOL which is recognized as an international system; HKBEAM and CEPAS, used in Hong Kong; GREEN STAR used in Australia; and CASBEE, used in Japan. This certification systems are given in Fig. 3.

In this study, a survey was conducted to highlight the importance of the category of land management, one of the criteria of the green building certification systems, and to identify sub-criteria under this title more objectively. Worldwide valid certification systems and parts of the certification systems regarding land management that are tried to be established in Turkey were examined to determine the survey questions and in line with this, a literature review was performed. The experts in Turkey were interviewed to gather ideas and insights. By listing the answers from these experts using the AHP method, the criteria and sub-criteria of land method were determined and are shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Land management criteria determined by literature study and experts view
B- Building Features
B1. Being Functional
B2. Project Design
B3. Establish Health and Comfort
B4. Appropriate to Urban Aesthetics
B5. Being Environment Friendly
B6. Being Energy Efficient
B7. Providing Water-Saving
B8. Having Waste Management
B9. Using Renewable Energy
B10. Having Material Management
B11. Being Economical
B12. Using Recycled Material
B13. Being Innovative
E- Protection of Ecological Values and Properties of the Land
E1. Protection of Underground and Surface Waters
E2. Protection of Biodiversity
E3. Protection of Wetlands and Coastal Regions
E4. Reuse of the Land
A- Land Properties
A1. Ambient Air Quality
A2. Solar Energy Potential
A3. Renewable Energy Source Potential
A4. Land Constraints
A5. Ecological Structure of the Region
A6. Climate Conditions of the Region
A7. Wind Energy Potential
A8. Cultural Heritage of the Region
A9. Topography of the Land
A10. Geological Structure of the Land
A11. Geothermal Energy Potential
A12. Zoning Status of the Land
A13.Demographic Structure of the Region
A14. Market Value
K- Proximity to Urban Equipments and Transportation Networks
K1. Proximity to Bicycle Roads and Sport Areas
K2. Proximity to Metro and Light Rail Systems
K3. Proximity to Rest and Recreation Areas
K4. Proximity to Public Service Areas
K5. Proximity to Commercial Facilities and Living Centers
K6. Proximity to Health and Personal Care Facilities
K7. Proximity to Culture and Art Centers
R- Identification of Risks
R1. Natural Disaster Risk
R2. Risk of Human Disaster
R3. Security
R4. Proximity to Garbage Collection Points
R5. Proximity to Treatment Plants
R6. Proximity to Animal Shelters
AHP provides a comprehensive and rational framework for structuring a decision problem, representing and measuring its elements, relating these elements to overall objectives, and evaluating alternative solutions (Saaty 1980, Li et al 2019b). In the AHP method, there is a hierarchical structure consisting of goals, criteria, qualifications and alternatives and among these, weights are revealed according to the ratio scale from the preferences expressed in the form of binary comparisons by the decision maker. Once these weights are transformed into holistic weights or priorities for options with the help of linear-additive model, the options are ranked according to the priority value results (Çınar 2004).

AHP does not recommend a mandatory method for use, instead it enables decision-makers to use their own capacity, leading them to make them take better decisions (Çelikyay 2002).

AHP application consists of five steps (Çelikyay 2002, Canada et al 1996):

Structuring decision hierarchy,
Collecting data with one-to-one comparisons,
Checking the consistency of objective judgements,
Using the eigenvector method to calculate weights, and
Combining weights to determine the order of decision alternatives

An objective function forms the top layer of the AHP hierarchy. Under this objective there are criteria, sub-criteria, and options respectively. The use of the hierarchy is an effective way of dealing with complex systems. While enabling system organization, it also enables in-system information control and communication. It is therefore functionally active (Topcu 2000). Figure 4 shows a simple AHP model.

Criteria that make up the hierarchy is scored according to a certain scale through binary comparisons. Table 2 shows the rating scale used in AHP.

Table 2

AHP rating scales
Level of Importance	Definition	Interpretation
1	Equally preferred	Two activities contribute equally to the objective
3	Moderately	Experience and judgment slightly favour one activity over another
5	Strongly	Experience and judgment strongly or essentially favour one activity over another
7	Very Strongly	An activity is strongly favoured over another and its dominance demonstrated in practice.
9	Extremely	The evidence favouring one activity over another is of the highest degree possible for affirmation
2,4,6,8...	Intermediate values	Used to represent a compromise between preferences listed above

Survey questions were prepared according to these identified criteria, and they were sent to 3,270 instructors working in all architecture, urban and regional planning, and civil engineering departments in Turkey, and meaningful answers were received from 148 of those people. Since the concept of green building and green building certification system has only recently gained importance in Turkey, the number of instructors who can give realistic answers to the questionnaire is low.

In order for land management to gain a social dimension, the requirements of the factors that constitute the demographic structure of society and the standards required for a high quality of life should be determined. Thus, the balance between social norms is focused, thereby ensuring social equality. In this context, two different surveys were conducted in order to identify national needs, to understand the level of awareness of green buildings, and to determine the criteria related to land management. The first one was conducted in accordance with the Delphi technique, a systematic information collection method, in order to evaluate specific questions or issues, but the survey could not be concluded because the number of specialists in this field was insufficient, and the groups made up of these specialists did not share information since they were in competition with each other. In the other survey study, participants were asked to give a score from 1 to 5 to the survey questions prepared according to criteria in the literature, and the weights of the criteria were calculated according to the data obtained.

The frequencies and percentages of the answers given to the survey questions were determined according to five different answers including unimportant, less important, moderately important, important, and very important. These were used in determining the weights of sub-criteria of the criteria determined under the category of land management. The averages and standard deviations of the answers were calculated as a next step. According to these calculations, the main criteria and sub-criteria were sorted by their own weights. Within this scope, averages and standard deviations were calculated as follows:

$${\text{K}}_{\text{o}}=\frac{\text{N}}{\text{n}}$$

Ko = Criteria mean

N = The total of scores given by the participants to the relevant criteria

n = The number of participants

The standard deviation is calculated by taking the square root of the variance.

$$\text{S}=\sqrt{\frac{\sum {{(\text{N}}_{\text{i}}-{\text{K}}_{\text{o}})}^{2}}{\text{n}-1}}$$

S = Standard deviation

Ni = The score given by participant to the i question

Ko = Criteria mean

n = Number of participants

The calculated mean, standard deviation, weight, and sorting are shown in Table 3. The main criteria for sorting according to calculated weights was found to be building features, protection of ecological values and properties, land properties, proximity to urban equipment and transportation networks, and identification of risks. The weight of the main criterion building features was calculated as 4.4543, that of protection of ecological values and properties of land as 4.3851, that of land properties as 4.0589, that of proximity to urban equipment and transportation networks as 3.3861, and that of identification of risks as 3.5045. The sub-criteria were also aligned by their own weights.

The rapid increase in the number of consumers in our societies has caused a significant waste management problem as well as other problems such as global warming and climate change, degradation of natural vegetation and soil resources, reduction of water resources and drinking water, destruction of biodiversity, damage to the ozone layer, and environmental pollution. While waste did not cause much problem in society before, it has grown over time and reached a level that will threaten the entire world ecosystem. Environmentalists have rallied behind the concept of sustainability and this concept has been applied in many important areas, including the construction sector, with a sustainable development perspective (Sırkıntı 2012).

The fact that energy consumption in buildings constitute 40% of overall energy consumption has led the construction sector to make more sustainable and environmentally friendly buildings and has led to the concept of green building. As green building projects got off the ground, green building certification systems have been created to evaluate the environmental impact of these buildings, and to measure and document energy efficiency.

Green building certification systems examine buildings based on a multitude of criteria and scores and certifies them. One of the most important topics of green building certification systems is land management. To understand this concept in the best way possible and to elaborate on this concept within the scope of a green building project are very important for the success of green building projects. Social, economic and ecological components that form the basis of sustainability for effective land management in a green building project need to be understood and utilized in the best way possible.

In order for the land management concept to gain an economic dimension, it should be aimed to create a system which is suitable for the socio-economic structure, decreasing the costs while increasing the efficiency, enabling the use of recycled materials and maintaining the balance with the production sector as well as the environmental values. To give an economic dimension to the criteria created for this purpose, criteria such as cost effectiveness analysis, use of recycled materials, energy efficiency, renewable energy use, material management were added to the system.

Land management, which aims to preserve the biodiversity, wetlands and coastal areas based on the reuse of land for the purpose of preserving the ecological value and characteristics of the region, ensures that natural balance is maintained by reducing environmental degradation. Criteria such as ambient air quality, waste management, environmental friendliness, protection of underground and surface water were added in order to provide ecological dimension to the criteria set for this purpose.

The percentages of the 5 different responses (not important, less important, moderately important, important, very important) given to the questionnaire were calculated to be used to determine the weight of the criteria and sub-criteria of land management. The percentage of each sub-criterion within all criteria is calculated as follows:

$${K}_{i}=\left(\frac{{n}_{i}}{\sum {n}_{i}}\right)*100$$

${K}_{i}$ : I. percentage of criterion

${n}_{i}$ : I. average of criterion

Green buildings and green building certification systems have been gaining importance in the world as well as in Turkey, and meetings and seminars were delivered to create awareness and put forward new ideas since 2012. The Green Buildings Summit, which has been taking place since 2012 and is organized every year, is an indicator of the awareness of the green building concept in our country. At the first summit, urban transformation and sustainability issues were the most prominent. It was also mentioned that green buildings are no longer luxury and have become day-to-day necessity. At the end of the summit, the final declaration stated that green building projects should be designed for urban transformation applications and especially for energy efficiency in the transformation of shanty houses, and that among those shanty houses, the ones that are in good condition can be reused after restoration. It was emphasized that the costs of green buildings are now approaching and levelling traditional building costs, that the savings provided by green buildings in terms of the country's economy are significant, and that the green housing certification should be supported by law.

The 2nd International Green Buildings Summit, which was held in 2013, addressed the theme of green transformation and linked the solution of environmental, economic and sociological problems to these transformations. At this summit, it was highlighted that public participation is very important in this transformation, and that in order to increase savings associated with green buildings, energy efficiency should be focused on existing buildings.

The following points were emphasized in the decisions taken at the 3rd International Green Buildings Summit in 2014, concepts such as sustainability and livability will gain a meaning only when they are realized; these should be the basic concepts and principles in the process of urban transformation; and in order to realize the concept of sustainability and green transformation, human behavior should be changed first.

In the 4th Green Building Summit held in 2016, the main theme was sustainable efficiency and building management. At the summit, it was mentioned that the energy efficiency is inevitable, that there are savings and advantages associated with the process; and that it is necessary to implement energy efficiency projects in the public sector. It was revealed that building management impacts the cost significantly, and that all the owners of the building should adopt the building management throughout the life span of the building by explaining how energy saving can be achieved in buildings, and that sustainability should be transferred from generation to generation.

The criteria of land management were determined in line with the decisions taken as a result of these summits, expert opinions, local conditions and needs of our country. In order to determine criteria and sub-criteria applicable to land management, the land-related parts of the BREEAM, LEED, SBTOOL, and ÇEDBİK systems were examined. Based on these examinations and local needs, sub-criteria of the land management category were determined to be building features, protection of ecological values and properties of the land, land features, proximity to urban equipment and transportation networks, and identification of risk. The sub-criteria of these criteria were determined and survey questions were prepared for each criterion. These survey questions were then sent to the instructors involved in the discipline of green building certificate systems, and responses were entered into the SPSS program. Firstly, a reliability analysis was performed with SPSS. The reliability analysis made was Cronbach Alpha. As a result of this analysis, the Cronbach Alpha value was found to be 0.921. The values above 0.9 are considered excellent and this resulted in a perfectly reliable survey. After this analysis, the weights that would be assigned to the criteria were determined according to sorting, scoring, and paired comparison methods. The most important sub-criterion of the building features criterion was found to be functional.

Table 4

Sorting, scoring and paired comparison methods
Main Criterion	Sub Criterion	Main Criterion Order	Sub Criterion Order	Sorting Method	Scoring Method	Paired Comparison Method
Building Features	Being Economical	1	11	0,3333333	0,3846154	0,3599995
	Being Functional		1
	Appropriate to Urban Esthetics		4
	Being Environment Friendly		5
	Using Recycled Material		12
	Being Innovative		13
	Being Energy Efficient		6
	Providing Water-Saving		7
	Having Waste Management		8
	Project Design		2
	Using Renewable Energy		9
	Having Material Management		10
	Establish Health and Comfort		3
	Reuse of Land	2	4	0,2666667	0,2692308	0,2800010
Protection of Ecological Values and Properties of Land	Protection of Wetlands and Coastal Regions		3
	Protection of Biodiversity		2
	Protection of Underground and Surface Waters		1
	Land Constraints	3	5	0,2	0,1923077	0,2000049
	Renewable Energy Source Potential		4
	Ambient Air Quality		1
	Market Value		14
Land Features	Zoning Status of the Land		12
	Topography of the Land		9
	Geological Structure of the Land		10
	Climate Conditions of the Region		6
	Cultural Heritage of the Region		8
	Demographic Structure of the Region		13
	Ecological Structure of the Region		3
	Solar Energy Potential		2
	Wind Energy Potential		7
	Geothermal Energy Potent		11
Proximity to Urban Equipments Transportation Networks	Proximity to Public Service Areas	4	4	0,1333333	0,1153846	0,1199992
	Proximity to Metro and Light Rail Systems		2
	Proximity to Rest and Recreation Areas		3
	Proximity to Bicycle Roads and Sport Areas		1
	Proximity to Commercial Facilities and Living Centers		5
	Proximity to Culture and Art Centers	5	1	0,0666667	0,0384615	0,0400008
	Proximity to Health and Personal Care Facilities		2
	Natural Disaster Risk		3
Identification of	Risk of Human Disaster		7
Risks	Security		5
	Proximity to Garbage Collection Points		4
	Proximity to Animal Shelters		8
	Proximity to Treatment Plants		6

The concept of green building can be successful if it is implemented in accordance with people’s needs and local conditions. A survey was conducted in line with the opinions of the experts for this reason. The decrease in the amount of water resources is a trend that is witnessed not in our country but worldwide. So, the most important criteria of the Criterion for the Protection of The Ecological Value and Properties of the Land is determined as the Protection of Underground and Surface Water. As Turkey is located on the North Anatolian Fault Line, there is high earthquake risk in the region. Therefore, the most important criterion of risk criteria is natural disaster risk.

The need for a local certification system has increased in order to determine the attributes of green buildings, which have begun to gain importance and are constantly increasing in numbers in Turkey. As a result, different working groups have prepared different certificate systems.

Land management, which is one of the categories that need to be included in this system in the event that a national certification system can be created in Turkey, was discussed, and the criteria and their weights under this category were determined in the study. After a literature search was performed, the criteria were determined to be building features, protection of ecological values and properties of the land, land features, proximity to urban equipment and transportation networks, and identification of risks. The sub-criteria of these criteria were determined by the survey study, and the weights of these sub-criteria were determined by sorting, scoring, and paired comparison methods.

In our country, buildings are being constructed according to the Energy Efficiency Law. The main objective for the buildings to be constructed according to this law is to reduce the consumption of energy used. It is known that the energy consumption of buildings in our country is currently approximately 35%, and the greenhouse gases emitted from these buildings is up to 30%. The aim is to increase the use of renewable energy resources and thus to reduce damage to the environment with the energy identity document given to the buildings. However, the energy identity document does not fully meet the needs. The creation of a more comprehensive certification system has become a necessity for both the national economy and green cities. Approaches such as tax exemption, mortar exemption, and tax reduction can be applied to encourage people to choose to build new buildings as green ones. With this application, the aim can be, not only for people to live in more comfortable and healthy buildings but also in a greener and more livable world to be delivered to future generations. All segments of the society should be informed, and their awareness be raised.

The concept of a building management system that provides for computers to be used more intensively than people in order for systems in buildings to be used reliably and healthily has recently entered our lives. This system provides central control and information for operating systems. Systems operate according to a certain time program and through this economize energy consumption. These systems reduce energy costs and errors and increase productivity by providing a periodic maintenance process. So, in order to benefit from these systems, it is very important for green buildings to be erected. The integration of building management systems into green buildings will bring many benefits to green building projects.

Our country consists of seven different geographical regions. Each region has its own climate conditions and living standards. People living in these areas have different needs in terms of materials and techniques and natural regional differences. For example, since the amount of precipitation is high in the Black Sea region, it may be necessary to take advantage of rain water in the project. Considering that solar energy potential in the Mediterranean region is higher than other regions, the solar energy aspect of the buildings in this region would be different. Accordingly, the inclusion of additional features in the certificate system for different regions is bound to provide more realistic results. These can only be achieved by fully understanding the concept of sustainability, creating sustainability policies, and ultimately, making them real.

In this study, the need for changing the green building certification system for regional differences was considered. The study can provide a foundation for conducting individual projects. For example, in urban transformation projects, a green building project can be implemented considering the geographical characteristics of the region.

Author contribution Sevim Bilge Erdede: conceptualization, methodology, literature review, writing of draft, statistical analysis and conclusion; Sebahattin Bektaş: reviewing, editing and supervision

Funding Not applicable.

Data availability Please contact the authors for data requests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate We declare that we have no human participants, human data or human issues.

Consent for publication We don’t have any individual person’s data in any form.

Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests

Ade R, Rehm M (2019a) The unwritten history of green building rating tools: a personal view from some of the ‘founding fathers’. Building Res Inform 48:1–17
Ade R, Rehm M (2019b) Buying limes but getting lemons: Cost-benefit analysis of residential green buildings- A New Zealand case study. Energy Build 186:284–296
Akgül U (2010) Sürdürülebilir kalkınma: Uygulamalı antropolojinin eylem alanı. Antropoloji Dergisi 24:133–164
Ameen RFM, Mourshed M, Li H (2015) A critical review of environmental assessment tools for sustainable urban design. Environ Impact Assess Rev 55:110–125
Bauer M, Mösle P, Schwarz M (2010) Green Building: Guidebook for Sustainable Architecture. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Springer, p 210
Berardi U (2017) A cross-country comparison of the building energy consumptions and their trends. Resour Conserv Recycl 123:230–241
Canada JR, Sullivan WG, White JA (1996) Capital Investment Analysis for Engineering and Management, 3rd edn. London, Pearson, p 624
Chan APC, Darko A, Ameyaw EE, Owusu-Manu DG (2017) Barriers affecting the adoption of green building technologies. J Manag Eng 33:3
Cordero AS, Melgar SG, Marquez JMA (2019) Green building rating systems and the new framework level(s): a critical review of sustainability certification within Europe, Energies, 13:66
Costanza R, Patten BC (1995) Defining and predicting sustainability. Ecol Econ 15(3):193–196
Çelikyay S (2002) Selection of the multi-role fighter aircraft with using multi-attribute decision making methods. Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, p 148
Çınar Y (2004) Multi attribute decision making and an implementation on evaluation of financial performances of banks. Ankara University, Ankara, p 240
Dale PF, Mclaughlin JD (1988) Land Information Management. Oxford University Press, p 169
Darko A, Chan APC (2016) Critical analysis of green building research trend in construction journals. Habitat Int 57:53–63
Ding Z, Fan Z, Tam VWY, Bian Y, Li IMCS, Illankoon S, Moon S (2018) Green building evaluation system implementation. Build Environ 133:32–40
Doan DT, Ghaffarianhoseini A, Naismith N, Zhang TR, Ghaffarianhoseini A, Tookey JA (2017) Critical comparison of green building rating systems. Build Environ 123:243–260
HeY, Kvan T, Liu M, Li B (2018) How green building rating systems affect designing green. Build Environ 133:19–31
Hou H, Wu H (2021) Tourists’ perceptions of green building design and their intention of staying in green hotel. Tourism and Hospitality Research 21(1):115–128
Houghton A, Castillo-Salgado C (2020) Analysis of correlations between neighborhood-level vulnerability to climate change and protective green building design strategies: A spatial and ecological analysis. Building and Environment, pp. 168
Ignatius J, Rahman A, Yazdani M, Saparauskas J, Haron SH (2016) An integrated fuzzy anp-qfd approach for green building assessment. J Civil Eng Manage 22(4):551–563
Işıldar GY, Gökbayrak A (2018) Evalution of green building criteria according to development level of countries. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi 7(1):46–57
Jorgenson AK, Fiske S, Hubacek K, Li J, McGovern T, Rick T, Schor JB, Solecki W, York R, Zycherman A (2019) Social science perspectives on drivers of and responses to global climate change.Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Climate Change, 10(1)
Kaya YF (2021) Global diffusion of green building certification systems (gbcs): a lead and lag markets model, İzmir Institute of Technology, İzmir, 95
Keleş R (1998) Kentbilim Terimleri Sözlüğü, 2nd edn. İmge Kitabevi Yayınları, Ankara, p 224
Komeily A, Srinivasan RS (2015) A need for balanced approach to neighborhood sustainability assessments: a critical review and analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society 18:32–43
Kubba S (2010) Green Construction Project Management and Cost Oversight. Butterworth-Heinemann, p 560
Lazar N, Chithra K (2020) A comprehensive literature review on development of Building Sustainability Assessment Systems. J Building Eng 32:101450
Lazar N, Chithra K (2021) Green building rating systems from the prospect of sustainability dimensions through the building lifecycle. Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Li Y, Chen X, Wang X, Xu Y, Chen P (2017) A review of studies on green building assessment methods by comparative analysis. Energy Build 146:152–159
Li Y, Zhu N, Qin B (2019a) What affects the progress and transformation of new residential building energy efficiency promotion in China: Stakeholders’ perceptions, Energies, 12:1027
Li YL, Han MY, Liu SY, Chen GQ (2019b) Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by buildings: A multi-scale perspective. Build Environ 151:240–250
Li Y, Rong Y, Ahmad UM, Wang X, Zuo J, Mao G (2021) A comprehensive review on green buildings research: bibliometric analysis during 1998–2018. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, p 28
Liao B, Lin L (2022) How can green building development promote carbon emission reduction efficiency of the construction industry? Based on the dual perspective of industry and space. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, p 29
Lopez-Behar D, Tran M, Froese T, Mayaud JR, Herrera OE, Merida W (2019) Charging infrastructure for electric vehicles in multi-unit residential buildings: mapping feedbacks and policy recommendations. Energy Policy 126:444–451
McPhillips LE, Chang H, Chester MV, Depietri Y, Friedman E, Grimm NB, Kominoski JS, McPhearson T, Mendez-Lazaro P, Rosi EJ, Shiva JS (2018) Defining extreme events: a cross-disciplinary review. Earth’s Future 6:441–455
Meng Q, Liu Y, Li Z, Wu C (2021) Dynamic reward and penalty strategies of green building construction incentive: an evolutionary game theory-based analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, p 28
Mileti DS (1999) Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States. Joseph Henry Press: Washington D.C., 371
National Research Council of The National Academies (2013) Energy-Efficiency Standards and Green Building Certification Systems, The National Academies Press: Washington, D.C., 218
Olubunmi OA, Xia PB, Skitmore M (2016) Green building incentives: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 59:1611–1621
Pamuk R, Kuruoğlu M (2016) Sustainability in costruction sector and universal application of building costruction examples. Beykent Univ J Sci Eng 9(1):161–177
Rajabi M, Sardroud JM, Kheyroddin A (2021) Green standard model using machine learning: identifying threats and opportunities facing the implementation of green building in Iran. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, p 28
Reed RG, Krajinovic-Bilos A, Reed MAJ (2017) Green Building Rating Systems. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 99–112
Saaty TL (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 287
Saka İ (2011) Sustainability evaluation of an office building in Istanbul in the scope of LEED certification system. Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, p 162
Sartori T, Drogemuller R, Omrani S, Lamari F (2021) A schematic framework for life cycle assessment (LCA) and green building rating system (GBRS).Journal of Building Engineering,38
Shafique M, Kim R, Rafiq M (2018) Green roof benefits, opportunities and challenges-a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 90:757–773
Shan M, Hwang B (2018) Green building rating systems: Global reviews of practices and research efforts. Sustainable Cities and Society 39:172–180
Shan M, Liu WQ, Hwang BG, Lye JM (2020) Critical success factors for small contractors to conduct green building construction projects in Singapore: identification and comparison with large contractors. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, p 27
Shen L, Yan H, Fan H, Wu Y, Zhang Y (2017) An integrated system of text mining technique and case-based reasoning (TM-CBR) for supporting green building design. Build Environ 124:388–401
Sırkıntı H (2012) As part of sustainability implementation of green construction and proposition to LEED certification system. Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, p 133
Thakur AK, Pappu A, Thakur VK (2018) Resource efficiency impact on marble waste recycling towards sustainable green construction materials. Curr Opin Green Sustainable Chem 13:91–101
Tebbouche H, Bouchair A, Said G (2017) Towards an environmental approach for the sustainability of buildings in Algeria. Energy Procedia 119:98–110
Topcu Y (2000) Integrated decision aid model for multiattribute problem solving. Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, p 261
URL-1 United Nations Environment Programme Global Status Report (2017) Available online: https://www.worldgbc.org/sites/default/files/UNEP%20188_GABC_en%20%28web%29.pdf. Accessed 27 March 2019)
URL-2 WorldGBC, About Green Building-What Is Green Building? https://www.worldgbc.org/what-green-building, Accessed 07 January 2022)
URL-3 Real Estate. Available online: https://www.zillow.com/rental-manager/resources/?source=topnav&itc=postbutton_topnav Accessed 15 December 2015)
URL-4 Sixteen National/Territorial All-Time Extreme Heat Records Set in (2015) Weather Underground. Available online: https://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/sixteen-nationalterritorial-alltime-extreme-heat-records-set-in-2015.html Accessed 16 April 2020)
URL-5 U.N. Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. U.S. AID, Universite Catholique de Louvain Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (2015) Disasters in Numbers. Available online: https://www.cred.be/2015-disasters-numbers Accessed 25 April 2020)
URL-6 Designing Buildings Wiki. Available online: https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Bottom-up_approach_to_address_the_challenges_of_low-carbon_eco-cites Accessed 06 December 2016)
Ülger NE (2010) Türkiye'de Arsa Düzenlemeleri ve Kentsel Dönüşüm. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, p 372
Wang G, Yang L, Zuo J, Hu W, Qingwei N, Heqian L (2021) Who drives green innovations? Characteristics and policy implications for green building collaborative innovation networks in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, p 143
Wang Q, Zhu K, Guo Z, Shen W, Kang X (2021) Research hotspots and tendency of green building based on bibliometric analysis. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 719 (2)
Yılmaz E (2019) Evaluation of ecological sustainability angle green building certification system in Turkey. İstanbul Aydin University, İstanbul, p 187
Yudelson J (2008) The Green Building Revolution. Island Press, Washington, p 272
Zhang C, Cui C, Zhang Y, Yuan J, Luo Y, Gang W (2019) A review of renewable energy assessment methods in green building and green neighborhood rating systems. Energy&Buildings 195:68–81

Table 3 is available in the Supplementary Files section.

Table3.jpg
Table 3. Mean, standard deviation, weight and importance sorting of survey data
Table3a.jpg

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Major Revision
17 May, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
25 Jul, 2022
Reviews received at journal
30 Apr, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
20 Apr, 2022
Editor invited by journal
11 Apr, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
01 Apr, 2022
First submitted to journal
28 Mar, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Land Management Criteria for Green Building Certification Systems in Turkey

Status:

Version 2

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Sustainability

Green Buildings

Green Building Certification Systems

Material And Method

Results And Discussion

Conclusions And Suggestions

Declarations

References

Table 3

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 2