Adaptation of international sustainability rating tools to Bahrain: A comparative analysis of eleven systems

The damage humans caused to the environment post the industrial revolution fostered developing sustainability-rating systems – a number of evaluation instruments that focus on various factors to evaluate buildings and small-scale urban developments. Nevertheless, no buildings are certified in Bahrain, the environmentally challenged country in the Arabian Gulf. The paper aims to discuss these issues.,This study assesses 11 sustainability-rating systems: LEED, Green Globes, BREEAM, DGNB, SBTool, WELL, CASBEE, Green Star, HQE, GSAS and the Pearl Rating System (PRS). These were selected because of their international applicability, popularity and importance. The study adopts a system of criteria using a comparative review and cross-comparisons to draw conclusions on the compliance of the selected systems to the Bahraini context and assesses the need and importance of a customised sustainability-rating tool.,The study concluded that LEED is the most comprehensive, international and versatile sustainability-rating system. It is also the most popular. Nevertheless, the PRS is the most relevant to the Bahraini context and is the easiest to access.,This paper provides a deep understanding of sustainability-rating tools and introduces a methodology of comparison that can be used as a reference when choosing between tools.

[1]  Martin Fischer,et al.  SUSTAINABILITY RATING SYSTEMS , 2012 .

[2]  F. Al-Khalifa,et al.  International Sustainability Rating Tools: A Methodology for Adoption to Local Contexts , 2018, KnE Engineering.

[3]  Roha W. Khalaf.  THE RECONCILIATION OF HERITAGE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT: The Success of Criteria in Guiding the Design and Assessment of Contemporary Interventions in Historic Places , 2015 .

[4]  Bode Abiodun Orola,et al.  Assessment of users' responses to air change rates in free running office buildings , 2017 .

[5]  Renard Y.J. Siew,et al.  Sustainability rating tools for buildings and its wider application , 2017 .

[6]  Lars Coenen,et al.  The Role of Trials and Demonstration Projects in the Development of a Sustainable Bioeconomy , 2017 .

[7]  S. Hadidi-Moud,et al.  Impact of residual stress and elastic follow-up on fracture , 2007 .

[8]  Chengzhi Peng,et al.  BRIDGING OUTDOOR AND INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL SIMULATION FOR ASSESSING AND AIDING SUSTAINABLE URBAN NEIGHBOURHOOD DESIGN , 2012 .

[9]  A. Amin.  SUSTAINABLE URBAN LANDSCAPE: AN APPROACH FOR ASSESSING AND APPROPRIATING INDICATORS , 2012 .

[10]  F. Ghina,et al.  Sustainable Development in Small Island Developing States , 2003 .

[11]  R. Bose.  Energy Efficient Cities : Assessment Tools and Benchmarking Practices , 2010 .

[12]  Michael G. Lipsett,et al.  A Review of Sustainability Assessment and Sustainability/Environmental Rating Systems and Credit Weighting Tools , 2011 .

[13]  Salvatore Carlucci,et al.  An Analysis of the Most Adopted Rating Systems for Assessing the Environmental Impact of Buildings , 2017 .

[14]  Molla Mekonnen Alemu.  Environmental Role of National Parks , 2016 .

[15]  Stephen Reay,et al.  Exploring the feasibility of cradle to cradle (product) design: perspectives from New Zealand scientists , 2011 .

[16]  Wayne Trusty,et al.  Standards versus Recommended Practice: Separating Process and Prescriptive Measures from Building Performance , 2008 .

[17]  Remah Y. Gharib.  SUSTAINABLE ASSESSMENT TOOL OF HISTORIC CENTERS: The Cases of Bath and Cambridge , 2014 .

[18]  Hasim Altan,et al.  Comparative Review of Five Sustainable Rating Systems , 2011 .

[20]  K. Bailey.  Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques. , 1994 .

[21]  Linda Reeder,et al.  Guide to Green Building Rating Systems: Understanding LEED, Green Globes, ENERGY STAR, the National Green Building Standard, and More , 2010 .

[22]  F. A. Khalifa.  Urban Sustainability and Transforming Culture in the Arabian Gulf: The Case of Bahrain , 2015 .