Luận văn thạc sĩ Quản lý xây dựng: Green building design criteria evaluation: Assessment of berde green building rating system

As a response to the strengthening inclination towards sustainability, Building for Ecologically Responsive Design Excellence BERDE was named the National Voluntary Green Building Rating

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

There has been a growing interest and inclination worldwide toward sustainability in recent decades This is in response to the immediate human consumption and degradation of the earth’s resources, as concluded by many academicians, scientists, and researchers worldwide Although it is expected that most of these resources are renewables, the consumption rate is considerably higher than the replacement rate It is estimated that the current volume of resources that humankind uses now will most likely be unavailable shortly if overconsumption is not controlled

Sustainability is introduced by the United Nations (UN) Brundtland Commission as the healthy and enough consumption of resources at a rate that will keep future generations thriving with the same aid [1] Further elaboration of sustainability includes the Three Es: Environment, Economy, and Equity, as shown in Figure 1-1 Three E’s was introduced to explain the need for prioritization for each concept equally in designing development programs and projects, especially in large-scale projects, to ensure that sustainability is achieved

Figure 1-1 Three Pillars/E's of Sustainability [2]

The synergistic process for these pillars creates a balanced design The method of interdisciplinary collaboration can ensure that the needs of the present generation can still be fulfilled while being prepared for the future These pillars, in combination of twos, are seen to be inadequate Describing programs and projects as bearable, viable, or equitable (a reference to Figure 1-1) might sound acceptable and justifiable Still, it must be known that this foregoes one crucial pillar of sustainability Not considering these three pillars altogether, serious consequences can happen, just like mining disasters (neglecting the environment), massive resettlement (forgetting equity), and economic depression (ignoring the economy)

Although these three are the common pillars, other publications also proposed adding other important project parameters such as institutional [3], cultural [4] [5], and technical [6] The role of institutions in the decision-making process is significant since it decides which specific aspect/s of sustainable development will be pushed through It is defined under Agenda 21, as published by the UN, as a “necessary extension” to accommodate societal and cultural determinants of development [7] Agenda 21 began inter-disciplinary inclusiveness of the concept of sustainability with policy development It also started initiatives for healthy communities and millennium cities which paved the way for the current sustainable urban movements The importance of the cultural domain in shaping sustainability is also deemed vital

As mentioned in the study of Soini et al., culture is a foundation that balances out the three (3) pillars This psychological reference is rooted in the idea that human decisions and actions to achieve sustainable development are based on culture and humans’ ability to recognize culture itself [5]

Another raised concept is the importance of adding a technical pillar, as recommended by Hill and Bowen in 1997 [6] But instead of aligning it with sustainability, the authors introduced sustainable construction as an evolutionary concept from sustainable development Technical sustainability can mean varying designs dependent on parameters such as performance, quality, and service of life [6]

In terms of sustainable construction, many researchers disagreed with the combined concept of sustainability and construction early on in the concept's inception The main reason is that the construction industry was known to have no ability to become sustainable (given the proposed definition of sustainability in Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living [8]) This report describes that activities that cannot go on forever are not sustainable, like construction activities Due to these varying definitions for sustainability and its branched-out concepts, sustainability is deemed endless and will continue to grow and develop

Based on Yahoo! Finance, the construction industry remains the Top 2 most significant industry, just after financial services, with a 12.5 trillion USD market value [9] Construction Industry, although profitable, foregoes the importance of prioritizing its ecological and environmental effects Based on the research performed by the construction blog BIMHow, the industry itself causes 23% of air pollution, 50% of climatic change, 40% of drinking water pollution, and 50%of landfill waste [10] Apart from its effect on pollution, the construction industry also consumes around 50% of the extracted resources worldwide [11] Niklas Hagelberg,

UN Senior Programme Officer for Climate Change, labeled material extraction as the chief culprit of climate change [12] Given these statistics, the construction industry must pursue more sustainable endeavors and practices

With United Nations as a leader, the sustainable development goals of 2030, also known as the SDGs, were released in 2015 The SDG solely focused on building sustainable communities is SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and communities The mission statement for SDG 11 is: “Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.” In addition, the World Green Building Council (WGBC) published various articles regarding the supportive stance of the council on other SDGs The committee mentioned that green building construction is a “true catalyst” in the sustainable movement [13]

The Philippines' leading institution for green buildings is the Philippine Green Building Council (PHILGBC) The council supervises all affairs related to green buildings [14] PHILGBC is also the supreme council for developing the Building for Ecologically Responsive Design Excellence (BERDE) Green Building Rating System (GBRS) BERDE serves as the national voluntary green building rating system [15] through the Philippine Energy Efficiency Program (PEEP) of the Department of Energy (DOE) [16] This GBRS was initially released in 2009 but was continuously improved and developed by PHILGBC with its latest version, BERDE Version 4.2.0, released in 2021 The core framework of BERDE includes 11 essential concepts in green buildings: management, use of land and ecology, energy, water, waste, materials, transportation, health and well-being, emissions, community engagement, and economic opportunity Aside from these concepts, BERDE also provides the contractors a leeway to pursue elective concepts such as heritage conservation and promotion, innovation, and additional socio-economic credits

Despite having a local GBRS, many international and local companies with their buildings and structures in the Philippines opt to attain other foreign GBRS like Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) Based on the report by PHILGBC, there are 43 BERDE-registered projects [17] While LEED, devised by the United States of America (USA), certified about 65 buildings in the Philippines, this number is still growing [18] The difference between the number of buildings is still noticeable considering that BERDE is designed to suit local situations The first building in the Philippines that became LEED-certified is the Texas Instruments Building in Baguio City only happened in the same year BERDE GBRS was released, 2009 [19].

Problem Statement

Despite being introduced for over a decade, BERDE is still not a name in the local construction industry The slow immersion of the construction industry in the Philippines with the BERDE GBRS can also be related to several factors affecting green building development in the Philippines This study intends to find the reasons for how to further integrate BERDE as a plausible GBRS for at least medium-to- large-sized companies In response, PHILGBC must do a meticulous evaluation of BERDE regularly The assessment will focus on the accuracy of BERDE to measure the capacity of each building when cross-checked with the BERDE core framework The latest version of BERDE, BERDE Version 4.2.0, is used in the assessment This comprehensive review will also determine the rationale behind the preference of local construction companies in acquiring certifications for LEED and BREEAM Furthermore, this study is also intended to provide a summary of recommendations for the further improvement of BERDE.

Research Objectives

BERDE, as the national voluntary green building rating system of the Philippines, is still not widely used by many local companies and building owners To bridge and find solutions to this gap, this study aims to provide recommendations as possible addenda for BERDE Version 4.2.0 that can make BERDE accessible and suitable to the local construction industry Specifically, this study seeks to:

• Analyze the BERDE GBRS on macro and micro-scale in accordance capacity of its users and the local industry itself

• Investigate the effectiveness of the current core framework of BERDE based on stakeholders’ preferences

• Identify the barriers being faced by the GBRS users in the application of BERDE

• Summarize the recommendations to fill the gaps identified in the BERDE User Guide

Scope and Limitations of the Study

The following restrictions and bounds will apply to this research to achieve the goals mentioned above:

1 The most significant limitation of the study of BERDE is the lack of many published studies and report that directly discusses BERDE Therefore, the primary and secondary data are highly reliant on the author’s review and evaluation of BERDE compared to the assessment and evaluation of other professionals within the local industry

2 BERDE was designed to be suitable for projects in the Philippines Therefore, the comparison with foreign GBRS is limited in areas and concepts that the author deems ideal for the local construction industry of the Philippines The recommendations identified in the study’s conclusion are localized in terms of their applicability in the Philippines

3 As a GBRS, BERDE has three categories for certification: new construction, renovation, and operations Each category has individual guides that can be used depending on the project's intent However, this study will only focus on new construction projects specifically The BERDE New Construction applies to any new buildings for design and construction, classified as commercial buildings, vertical residential buildings, clustered residential buildings, and educational buildings [17]

4 Since BERDE is a considerable undertaking, this study will only focus on two life cycle stages: Stage 1: Design and Stage 2: Construction The review is limited to Purpose and Intent, Requirements, Score Distribution, and Compliance Notes which is similar to the structure of BERDE’s User Guide for the ease of listing the addenda

5 BERDE is a relatively new GBRS Also, given that it is not well-known, there are only a few individuals that are well-informed about BERDE and its User Guide As this questionnaire specifically targets respondents who are studying and using BERDE User Guide Version 4.2.0, the sample size of 70 is deemed acceptable Also, as this is a policy-centric study, the backbone relies on the literature review and cross-referencing to the BERDE User Guide Only general conclusions (as listed in the hypotheses) were made from the quantitative analysis.

Significance of the Study

Green Building Rating Systems (GBRS) are guidelines to redirect structural design and construction to green construction GBRS is designed to encourage its users to include various sustainability concepts such as proper waste management, water management, energy usage reduction, risk reduction, economic gain, innovative solutions, and quality of life and well-being in the construction process A far more important goal of achieving a sustainable community can be met through these systems However, this is only possible when all key stakeholders exert collective effort

At the opening of this millennium, many international organizations pushed for developing the green building industry to ensure collaborative involvement amongst all But despite these, Public Engagement with sustainable solutions is still lacking, especially in the Philippines Although most professionals who work in the upstream management of the local construction industry are aware of its importance, those who are using these structures, the public, are not well informed It is in this regard that this study is needed This study can identify these barriers to why using GBRS, especially BERDE, is not a quintessential part of design and construction The evaluation and assessment of BERDE can also significantly impact decision-making and infrastructure development in the country

The results of this study can support planning and response strategies for the continuously developing construction industry Knowing how the key stakeholders feel about the dependability, effectiveness, and improvement needed by this system can also be the key to how BERDE should progress in its future development as a policy Ultimately, this study can serve as foundation research on the possibility of BERDE transitioning from a voluntary system into a requirement by the national government.

Contribution to Academic and Practical Fields

The academic community supports the research industry Any inventions and innovations created by academia have the potential to further fuel a far more significant transformation in society By comparing the results of this study to existing written works and other green building rating systems, it can establish a baseline for improving the current version of the BERDE User Guide The academe can use these recommendations as addenda to create a significantly more localized version by having it cross-evaluated with policies, programs, and projects led by national academic institutions in collaboration with the national government A lucrative development of the current BERDE rating system can occur through this

1.6.2 Practical Fields (Design and Construction)

The environmental impact of construction development projects is one of the essential post-construction considerations in this era of sustainability Many institutions are looking to control the significant adverse effects of these new advancements, given the exponential decline produced by modern developments everywhere The government and interested institutions can manage and properly account for this by creating an inclusive rating system for construction development projects connected to environmental efficacy and sustainability In addition to streamlining construction procedures within their purview, these upstream organizations can also ensure that the project's immediate environment is protected, conserved, and improved further.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Green Building Rating Systems

In coordination with the exponential increase in the number of green buildings being built worldwide, green building councils establish rating tools to quantify each building’s attempt to showcase green building technologies GBRS, as coined in the industry, is built to invite the public and private sectors to transition to green building construction Through these, it is expected that the national governments of each country can provide incentives for those construction projects that push for sustainable development [26]

The different GBRSs are designed dependent on their desired approach Rating tools focus on design and planning; some are in construction, while others highlight operation and maintenance Suitability for application is essential in creating the GBRSs since most of these GBRSs target varying environmental concerns differently [26] Even WGBC is not advocating any GBRS because they acknowledge that each GBRS is designed for a specific niche in the construction market However, to control the quality of each GBRS, the WorldGBC developed a guide to evaluating the effectiveness of a rating tool for each GBRS called Quality Assurance Guide for Green Building Rating Tools in 2015 [26] As promoted by the WorldGBC, this quality assurance guide can ensure that the development and implementation of the GBRS are “robust, transparent and to a good standard” [27] The International Organization for Standardization plays a vital role in the design of this guide The guide utilizes ISO 9001’s process approach This process is called the Plan-Do-Check-Act, as shown in Figure 2-2

Figure 2-2 Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle [28]

As of writing, most of the GBRS are just third-party, voluntary assessments for developers [29] However, many government agencies offer incentives whenever a building is granted certification for known GBRS Some of the famed rating systems are BREEAM (Building Research Establishment's Environmental Assessment Method, United Kingdom), CASBEE (Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency, Japan), Green Star (Australia, South Africa), and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, United States) are among the most applied worldwide These rating systems are almost similar in approach to the evaluation structure [30] Each criterion in the GBRS provides a specific number of points/scores to measure its adherence to being a green building.

Green Buildings in the Philippines

The Philippines is a country with rich history and culture It is also with an increasing population and a growing economy To meet the needs of its citizens, the Philippines has been focusing on expanding its economy and growing businesses Unfortunately, the expansion of companies and the construction of new buildings have negative environmental consequences Therefore, sustainable building practices must be implemented to protect the environment This is the reason why green construction has taken off in recent years.

Philippine Green Building Code

Philippine Green Building Code, also known as the GB Code, is a supporting reference for the National Building Code of the Philippines [31] by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) The code was developed in collaboration with various stakeholders, including the Building and Construction Industry Division of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), PHILGBC, and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) This code is the principal attempt of the Philippine government to infuse the local construction industry with green building technology It is the country’s primary regulatory tool for promoting the development of green buildings It defines what a green construction project is and what measures must be adopted to ensure it is environmentally sustainable

The code contains provisions and guidelines about improving building performance efficiency Following a framework based on an acceptable set of standards, it will enhance sound environmental and resource management that will counter the harmful gases responsible for the adverse effects of climate change It is expected to be effective throughout the building’s life cycle, including efficient use of resources, site selection, planning, design, construction, service, occupancy, operation, and maintenance, without a significant increase in cost” (Section 3: Objectives, [31]) The GB Code prioritizes these main features for a green building: energy efficiency, water efficiency, material sustainability, solid waste management, site sustainability, and indoor environmental quality The design requirements needed to satisfy these performance standards are enumerated and detailed in the GB Code in Section 9 The code is designed intricately, including the applicability and conditions for each feature The GB Code is written with the support of highly recognized and accredited academic and professional institutions in the building industry [32] The GB Code is the national initiative to kick off the roll-out for green building construction in the Philippines

The Philippine Government is acting to build an environment-sensitive national policy framework inclusive of all new emerging technologies for green construction The DPWH and Department of Energy (DEO) released the Adoption of the Guidelines on Energy Conserving Design of Buildings in 2021 as an additional reference for energy conservation [33] However, it must be noted that these codes are still written as a proposal for the design It is not yet implemented as a requirement for all construction projects These attempts to invite the industry to lean towards green construction are a failure, as reported by multiple news agencies [34], due to the lack of implementation and integration By just being mere initiatives, improvement soon with the Philippines’ green development industry will still be indefinite In this case, the current institutional arrangement of code implementation is one of the main reasons for a weak, almost unrecognizable change in the local construction scene Unless the fragmented governance design disables it to close the gap with the private sector, the GB Code will still need more revisions and improvements.

Philippine Green Building Council

As of 2021, there are 70 green building councils around the globe PHILGBC has been a member of the WGBSC since March 22, 2007 [35] Since then, PHILGBC has become a significant leaguer in transforming the local green building construction scene in the Philippines PHILGBC oversees the creation and continuous development of BERDE Since the release of BERDE, there are already

43 registered projects with a total gross floor area of 1.733.980.27m 2 for all registered projects [17] PHILGBC also provides training and seminars that train professionals to be BERDE Assessors Based on the Report by PHILGBC in 2019, there are currently 471 certified BERDE Professionals with 59 certified BERDE Assessors.

Building for Ecologically Responsive Design Excellence (BERDE)

BERDE, as described in the previous sections, is the national voluntary green building rating system in the Philippines It supports the nation's green-building initiatives, promotes industry trust, and inspires confidence This system is also developed under the requirements stated by the WGBC in its Quality Assurance for Green Building Rating Tools and the International Framework for Socio-economic Factors for Green Building Rating Tools in Developing Countries, also by WGBC in cooperation with the Green Building Council South Africa (GBSCA)

At the start of the certification process, the owner must register first It can be done in the PHILGBC office or online Then, the owner will also have to provide all the compliance requirements to prove that the structure is indeed a green building The list of conditions can be seen in the user guide on the BERDE website After the registration, for new construction certification, each project must pass two (2) stages Stage 1 is mainly focused on the design of the project and the plans, policies, and procedures aimed to be implemented during the project operation Stage 2 focuses more on the construction and the policies and procedure implementation Each stage has a separate Assessment report, and one must comply with both stages to attain the new buildings certification award

BERDE promotes its brand as a guidance tool, credible marketing tool, transparency tool, and compliance and policy support tool As a guidance tool, BERDE identifies itself to be updated with the current best practice in the industry BERDE also brags about being capable of accommodating numerous projects under different parameters

1 The content for this section mainly uses the information from BERDE Website (berdeonline.org) such as construction type, project type, life cycle stage, and occupancy type, as detailed in Table 2-1

Table 2-1 Catered Project Variation by BERDE

Construction Type Project Type Life Cycle Stages Occupancy Type

• New Construction or Fit-out

Apart from its variety of serviced projects, PHILGBC also categorizes this new GBRS as “resource-efficient, economically viable, and socially responsible” when applied by the users Many existing GBRSs brag about these three (3) characteristics However, not all are seen as working under these descriptions by the stakeholders Under these three, the typically questioned one is the financial aspect of getting the certification Most of the costs that take the most extensive cuts are for documentation time and effort, additional research and design, commissioning and modeling for compliance, different construction activities, and registration and assessment fees [36] As part of having the BERDE certification, many documents are needed, and its preparation will require an additional financial budget on top of the design and construction costs

BERDE also promotes itself as a marketing tool when awarding star ratings Like other GBRS, they positioned themselves to inform the public that the company behind the structure is serious about its sustainability initiatives It also gives the public the idea that the awarded facilities are better than those without the star certification Also, the third-party evaluation guarantees that each project will be evaluated, appraised, and certified reliably and objectively Aside from these, PHILGBC ensures that additional marketing support will be provided to these buildings during the events and activities led by PHILGBC

The star rating guide for BERDE is shown in Table 2-2 There are five (5) categories for a building to be called BERDE-certified Each star corresponds to the percentage score each project will attain based on the score gained by each project The lowest possible percentage to still get a star rating is 51%, equivalent to the building having good practice

Table 2-2 Star Rating Guide for BERDE The project may be awarded: If the project achieves a weighting of:

 One star 51% to 60% Good Practice

 Two stars 61% to 70% Ideal Performance

 Four stars 81% to 90% Country Leader

 Five stars 91% to 100% World Class

The percentage can be computed using the formula below:

The awarded score is the total score achieved under the Score Distribution of each sub-core framework The maximum score, however, varies depending on the certification stage, project type, and occupancy type The possible total score ranges from 89 to 116 To note, PHILGBC subtracts 20 points from each project's total available score The 20-point provides leeway for more projects to pass the certification For example, assuming a building under the S1 certification stage could get the highest marks under each core framework, its total score will be 136 points PHILGBC opted to reduce the maximum score by 20 points to account for the change in the recent version of BERDE As described by the current technical director of PHILGBC, Architect Mario Lawrence C Suelto, PHILGBC provided the maximum score mechanism to serve as the additional points previously under the category the Innovations or Electives included in its older versions In the older version of BERDE, electives are added apart from the core framework Namely, these are Heritage Conservation and Promotion, Innovation, and Additional Socio-Economic Benefits However, as mentioned by Architect Suelto, it was already removed and was replaced by deducting 20 points from the maximum score

As a transparency tool, BERDE stands by its principle of being an unbiased, balanced, and impartial certifying party The compliance requirements of BERDE reflect this standby PHILGBC The credit awarded under each sub-core framework is only achievable if the set of conditions is served and passed to BERDE as evidence of the building’s compliance Since all the documentation needed will be coming from the building owners themselves, it eases the assessment team's work by knowing the documentation obtained as primary data of the building is valid and credible

Under each sub-core framework, the BERDE User Guide provides a detailed list of compliance requirements apart from the Minimum System Requirements The design of BERDE is also based on how the assessment team can verify each pre-requisite listed under each core framework

The last branding stand of BERDE is its compliance with the established regulations, laws, and policies under the Philippine Government The Philippines has many agencies that oversee its initiatives toward sustainability, like the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the Department of Transportation (DOTr), and the Department of Energy (DOE) BERDE swears that this system’s goal is aligned with these agencies It also acknowledges the importance of being updated with the current laws and regulations at the national and local levels Vis-à- vis, many government agencies also consider BERDE as a guide in developing policies and programs for the building sector.

Core Framework of BERDE

The main framework of BERDE is shaped under 11 credit categories which will be discussed in this section In comparison, LEED Version 4 for Building Design and Construction has only eight categories [37], and BREEAM has ten categories [38] The different categories for these three (3) GRBS are shown in the table below

Table 2-3 Categories of BERDE, LEED, and BREEAM

Based on the table above, BERDE’s credit categories are similar to BREEAM apart from Community Engagement and Economic Opportunity Each credit category has a specific amount of scores it can add to the final total score for the star rating

Table 2-4 Credit Distribution for BERDE Version 4.2.0 2

Core Framework Maximum Score Percentage

Use of Land and Ecology 24 18%

2 The table is applicable only buildings of occupancy type: office buildings, vertical residential buildings, clustered residential buildings, educational buildings, and industrial buildings

Core Framework Maximum Score Percentage

Assuming that the score for each category signifies the level of importance the Council provides in these concepts, it can be interpreted that the health and well- being of the occupants are the most important for any green building The least credit is given to Waste Category, which only has three (3) points Due to the lack of discrepancy with the computation of each credit category’s plausible maximum score, users might interpret this in the set-up where the waste management is not as important as water and energy management However, this observation also relies on the number of sub-categories under each credit category Comparing the point distribution between BERDE’s credit categories could result in a mistaken impression of how each grading system defines or quantifies environmental effects by category, assuming this is the methodology used to weigh credits

A brief discussion of each category is listed in the following sections

Under Management, there are six (6) sub-categories (seven sub-categories for Occupancy Type: Tenant) identified by BERDE, providing 21 credit points This category mainly focuses on the inclusivity of the employees and staff working under the project in creating a green, sustainable building This category ensures a collaborative and integrated process in each stage to attain the green initiatives of the building One of the notable sub-categories in Management is MN-04 which is about Certified Green Buildings This three-point credit is given when the building under assessment is already registered under other GBRS duly recognized by NGBC and WGBC Apart from this, the other six (6) categories focus on employing knowledgeable professionals, public education about green buildings, and executing participatory planning campaigns with stakeholders

2.6.2 Use of Land and Ecology

Use Land and Ecology is the next highest score contributor amongst the 11 categories, with a maximum available score of 24 According to the BERDE User Guide, this seeks to promote sensible site selection and efficient land use that can significantly lessen a project's influence on the surrounding ecosystem and natural environment This category has nine (9) categories Still, only eight (8) are significant for this project as LE-08 Landscape Management is only applied for the project at Stage 3: Operations which is outside the study’s scope Land Use and Ecology, in broader terms, are also included in most international GBRS considerations like LEED and BREEAM Based on the sub-categories under this concept, BERDE focuses on developing flora within the building’s vicinity, such as adding vegetated open spaces and protecting environmentally critical areas Also, it must be noted that despite being under the Use of Land and Ecology category, area prioritization as a source of economic and social benefits is also traced, especially in LE-03 High Priority Site

The energy category covers various topics like reduction in usage, efficiency, conservation, and management This category is designed to avoid unsustainable, excessive energy use within the building’s system This six-point category has two sub-categories: Energy Consumption and Renewable Energy Energy Consumption is designed to cater to the building’s capacity to be efficient in terms of management and conservation strategies in the reduction of the overall energy demand of the project The second sub-category, renewable energy, highlights the importance of using either off-site or on-site supply The inclusion shows the preference of PHILGBC in using renewable energy over others Although this has been a massive leap for the GBRS, the capability of the industry to avail and supply renewable energy is far from being ready Based on DOE, the renewable energy suppliers registered under Green Energy Option Program are 18 companies [39] The field location of these companies is also far from cities, wherein green buildings are usually built However, the number of renewable energy suppliers increased significantly compared to just six registered companies in December 2020 This trend provides a hopeful perspective for the future of the local industry

The water category totaled nine points divided under three sub-categories: water consumption reduction, greywater reuse, and rainwater harvesting As described by BERDE, this category is included to manage the water demand of the project properly Proper management includes water usage volume reduction, wastewater recycling, and innovative and sustainable water strategies PHILGBC also stands by branding it as a GBRS that aspires to be cost-efficient In addition to reducing projects' environmental impact, efficient water consumption, and wastewater management, it can benefit the project team financially by saving money and reducing the need for water supplies Another branding by BERDE is being an updated GBRS when it comes to policies and programs by the government Rainwater harvesting is currently under the “Pending” legislative status in the Senate under Senate Bill No 1309 as filed by Senator Emmanuel Pacquiao [40] The act generally requires the mandatory installation of rainwater harvesting systems in new commercial, industrial, institutional, and residential infrastructure in major cities in the Philippines The passage of this senate bill as a law can change the current BERDE version

As mentioned, the waste category only accounts for three credit points for waste management With the primary goal of reducing waste generated by the project and removing garbage from landfills, the waste category focuses on the proper management of solid wastes The requirement for waste infrastructure, the financial burden of managing solid waste, and the detrimental effects of projects on water, air, and land resources are all reduced due to effective waste management at the source

However, the main takeaway for this category is its effect on the final credit rating in BERDE, as its score will only provide three points at max It is mentioned that about 10-30% of waste received by landfills around the world comes from construction and demolition projects [41] Despite these statistics, it is concluded in one study that environmental reasons come second to the implementation of waste management practices [42] It is mentioned in the same study that prioritization of waste management for environmental-related reasons is only done when it is required by the client or as prescribed by GBRS The authors also pointed out that the main reason for this is the weak implementation of government legislation Thus, most building owners are not compelled as there is no accountability and responsibility for the lack of a waste management system The credit distribution of BERDE supports this conclusion, given that the local national GBRS only assigned a small percentage for waste management

Materials as a category are further subdivided into three: green procurement, local procurement, and community-based enterprise procurement, with each category entitled to a maximum of three points for each Green Procurement encourages building owners to purchase construction materials with less environmental impact One specification highlighted for green procurement is the use of materials that pass the sustainability requirements established by other international organizations These organizations include the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), and local organizations such as the National Eco-labelling Program by Green Choice Philippines Despite being a local GBRS, adopting international standards accentuates the Council’s dedication to its green initiatives The local procurement sub-category recommends the purchase of materials that are locally manufactured BERDE defines locally manufactured materials as those from at most 160 km from the project However, the allowable distance is challenging due to the discrepancy in raw materials sourcing and supply across the country This specific radial distance cannot fully account for the lack of capability by neighboring towns and cities to produce green materials for a specific project Thus, another hurdle for buildings to be built far from material sources The last sub-category attests to the pledge of PHILGBC to be socially responsible It encourages the purchase of sustainable materials from social enterprises and community groups for social benefit As buildings have a high material budget, buying from these kinds of enterprises will significantly contribute to the economic growth of local artisans, community groups, and indigenous communities

This category accounts for 15 credit scores under five sub-categories These sub- categories include Key establishment Proximity, Mass Transportation Access, Preferred Parking, Cyclist Facilities, and Pedestrian mobility The entirety of the transportation category supports sustainable transportation strategies With vehicles being one of the largest pollution sources, this consideration of the PHILGBC to encourage mass transportation motivates the national government to develop more mass transport systems However, it must be known that the transport infrastructure and system in the Philippines have been deemed insufficient in terms of the level of service The Philippines' transport systems have experienced a slight quality improvement, but multimodal integration is still generally lacking, and a sizable portion of the country's road network is in bad shape Ineffective sector governance also prevents the sector from operating efficiently [43] The other four sub-categories are mostly inclined toward the social benefit of those who will use the building still, BERDE representing its branding towards social responsibility

Health care and Well-being is the category that accounts for the highest possible credit, which is 33 credit scores from 11 sub-categories Notably, there are 12 sub- categories, but only 11 apply to this study HW-11, with the credit name Places of Respite, only applies to healthcare facilities As the name of the category itself, this category assures the future occupants of the structure of their well-being The concepts of sustainability included under this category are visual comfort, daylight access, outdoor views access, thermal comfort, acoustic comfort, indoor air quality, microbial control, low volatile organic compounds (VOC) environmental, active design, urban agriculture, places of respite, and enhance occupational safety and health The WGBC provided six principles for a healthy and sustainable built environment wherein the design of this category is perfectly fitted [44] This category ensures that the users' health and comfort depend on the place they dwell It also encourages the building’s harmony with nature as the urban agriculture specification requires Notably, it also invites the user to facilitate healthy behavior by using the building’s design and architecture and further fueling the social value of the occupants and neighboring communities

Emission is another category with a low total credit score of six distributed under two sub-categories: greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory and refrigerants This category aims to control equipment, materials, and processes that utilize refrigerants and produce GHGs such as carbon dioxide, methane, and hydrofluorocarbons Similar to other GBRS, there are queries regarding the effectiveness of these compliance requirements The fundamental problem identified is that they almost entirely ignore the carbon-intensive construction phase and concentrate only on the operational stage of a building's life cycle [45] Due to this reality, the construction industry has an inaccurate and potentially harmful grasp of the actual carbon footprint of a particular structure But establishing this GBRS that considers emissions is the substantial first step in achieving this goal: fully accounting for emissions' qualitative and quantitative effects and their corresponding environmental impact

Community Engagement accounts for the total maximum credit score of four under two sub-categories: community facility (3 credit score) and Filipino Art (1 credit score) The purpose of this category is to provide recognition to buildings that intend to share their facility with their local community Through this, social interaction between the owners and their communities will flourish, thus improving communal resilience The second sub-category distinguishes buildings that display and house Filipino artworks that portray the country’s cultural heritage for the public This consideration for such a feat is something only a localized GBRS can recognize The BERDE Version 3.0.0 doesn’t include Community Engagement in its core framework Thus, the further development of BERDE is expected, seeing its accomplishments since its initial release

The 11 th category is economic opportunity, subdivided into green jobs, local labor, and women empowerment The purpose of this category is to provide green job opportunities for the community Through this category, BERDE also encourages the employment of local people, especially women, to work for this job stream As a result, it can entice residents of neighboring local cities and municipalities to relocate to these areas The importance given by PHILGBC to opening new economic opportunities mirrors the Council’s commitment to being socio-economically responsible.

Minimum System Requirements (MSR)

The minimum system requirements are the basic requirements to be immediately accepted upon application to the PhilGBC The MSR ensures that the project under application will comply with the existing building and environmental laws, regulations, and mandatory standards As mentioned by the User Guide itself, the requirements are also designed to see the total commitment of the applicants to planning, designing, building, and maintaining a green sustainable project Table 2-5 and Table 2-6 show the MSR for the two stages

Table 2-5 Minimum System Requirement of Stage 1: Design

Permits and Issuances by National and Local

Site Development Plan (Project Site and Building

Proof of Capacity for Shared Building Systems and

Projected Occupancy Profile Energy Base Case Report Water Base Case Report Waste Base Case Report

Service Contract Site Assessment Report

Waste Base Case Report Deconstruction Waste Management Plan

Policies and Procedures for Implementing the

Deconstruction Waste Plan List of Personnel Communication Records

Documentation of Implementation of the Policies and

Report on the Computation of the Waste Reduction of the Project

Site Assessment Report for Demolition and

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention and

Report on the Evaluation of the Implementation of the

Table 2-6 Minimum System Requirement of Stage 2: Construction

Code in the BERDE User

Permits and Issuances by National and Local

Site Development Plan (Project Site and Building

Code in the BERDE User

Proof of Capacity for Shared Building Systems and

Projected Occupancy Profile Energy Base Case Report Water Base Case Report Waste Base Case Report

Waste Base Case Report Deconstruction Waste Management Plan

Policies and Procedures for Implementing the

Deconstruction Waste Plan List of Personnel Communication Records

Documentation of Implementation of the Policies and Procedures

Report on the Computation of the Waste Reduction of the Project

Site Assessment Report for Demolition and

Construction Activity Pollution Prevention and

Code in the BERDE User

Report on the Evaluation of the Implementation of the Plan

Previous Literature about BERDE

One of the limitations of this study is that there is very few published research that provides a detailed evaluation and assessment of BERDE Using the previous studies, the following gaps that exist in BERDE, as a document and program, are summarized below

• BERDE’s core frameworks change between its version

The study by Amores studies the framework of BERDE, specifically, the 2011 version The 2011 version of BERDE has 11 core frameworks, namely: Management, Land Use and Ecology, Water, Energy, Transportation, Indoor Environmental Quality, Materials, Emissions, Waste, Heritage Conservation, and Innovation In comparison to the latest version, the latter two (2) core frameworks, heritage conservation, and innovation are not included anymore Based on the older version of BERDE, these two (2) categories were included to put special emphasis on the importance of the preservation of the Philippines' Culture and Heritage [46]

• BERDE’s score distribution changes between its version

There are previously four (4) major revisions of BERDE The first version of the BERDE User Guide has points equal to 110 while the latest one has a total of 136 The score distribution among the core framework’s included in each specific version is shown in Table 2-7 Amores mentioned that LEED’s credit-weighing focuses on performance and represents a more comprehensive take on sustainability [47] Every impact category is weighted relative to the other impact categories and then normalized to produce the final 100-point score [48]

Table 2-7 Score Comparison between Version 1.1.0 and Version 4.2.0

Use of Land and Ecology 24 20

But in the case of BERDE, there is no available explanation on the website that identifies the score distribution apart from its distribution over the identified sub-core frameworks The variability of scoring, with some sub-core frameworks scoring 2 and 3, is not reasoned out within the document As an end-user of the BERDE User Guide, it will be helpful if the PGBC can provide a background description of the score distribution The lack of clarity leads to misinterpretation that some core frameworks are more important than other [47] The system of the latest BERDE will also provide a score despite not passing the compliance requirements well, thus, leading to the variability in the score of 1,2, or 3

In the previous version of BERDE, notably version 2.0.0, the concept of Electives was introduced Electives are non-mandatory credits that may bring broader sustainability advantages but are not required by the core framework These extra credits will be kept in the Credit Library [17] However, this is non-existent in the latest version These frequent changes in the BERDE User Guide create untrustworthiness in the brand

• BERDE’s compliance requirements are hard to accomplish

The latest version of BERDE has two (2) types of requirements that are needed for the application The first one is the minimum system requirements as listed in Table 2-5 and Table 2-6 These requirements are just base data of the project and will not ensure a certification upon completion The second one is the compliance requirements specific for every sub-category which is quite detailed These are the requirements that will give the project points that allow them to have certification Also, many of these requirements are government-sector reliant which makes it harder for the applicants to acquire the compliance requirements.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Framework

The research framework used for this study is shown in Figure 3-1

Questionnaire Design

The questionnaire used for data collection comprises four (4) different parts A detailed description of these parts can be found in the next section In the Questionnaire Design section, the main questions used are listed as well as the processes they went through before distribution to the surveyees

3.2.1 Part II: Description of a GBRS

The basis of this questionnaire is formed from the actual BERDE description placed on the BERDE and PhilGBC websites This research investigates BERDE's effectiveness, challenges BERDE's pledge to sustainability, and how well BERDE User Guide embodies this pledge This part is designed to measure these pledges

Points taken from existing detailed research and reviews were also added to complete this questionnaire, such as the reviews made by M Amores entitled “Towards a Better Alignment of Green Building Rating Tools with Environmental Sustainability: The Case of the BERDE Green Rating System” [47] and By D.H Aquino, et al entitled “Study on the Relative Importance of Green Building Attributes in Philippine Urban Setting Using Analytical Hierarchy Process” [49] Table 3-1 shows the final points taken for the first part of the questionnaire

D1 The explanation of the purpose and intent is very detailed

D2 The adaptation of eleven core frameworks is valid

D3 The eleven categories are important parameters for green construction and sustainability

D4 The compliance requirements for credit distribution support the purpose and intent of all BERDE’s core frameworks

D5 The compliance requirements can be attained at a considerable cost

D6 The compliance requirements ensure that the project also follows national and local policies, laws, and regulations

D7 The compliance requirements are adequate to provide a good assessment and feedback regarding the building's green building initiatives

D8 The compliance requirements are manageable for the project team to obtain

D9 The compliance requirements are updated and are still effective during the conduct of this study

D10 Simultaneous acquisition of the compliance requirements is manageable

D11 The compliance requirements for BERDE can be complied with by all local contractors (small, medium, and big)

D12 The documents linked in the BERDE User Guide (V 4.2.0) are useful in assuring compliance

D13 The details, content, and requirements are explained well in the BERDE

D14 Following the BERDE User Guide, V 4.2.0 can ensure the compliance of the building under the eleven core frameworks

D15 Continuity can be observed between Stage 1 and Stage 2 as shown in

D16 Stages 1 and 2 are designed to adapt well to the local green building industry

D17 Stages 1 and 2 are updated with the current green building and sustainability trends

D18 The Credit Distribution, the credit score, and corresponding requirements are justified

D19 The compliance requirements and their corresponding credit score are correlatively matched

D20 Getting credit scores for BERDE is manageable

The minimum requirements, requirements, and compliance notes are relevant documents needed to prove the building's compliance with sustainability

D22 The credit score for each core framework is justified and well- distributed

D23 The economic costs needed for the compliance requirements are justified

D24 The presentation of modals and auxiliary models is well-defined and does not cause any inconsistency or vagueness

D25 BERDE provides positive brand recognition

D26 The core framework used by BERDE covers all important green building and sustainability concepts

D27 BERDE User Guide V 4.2.0 provides an adequate explanation for the award acquisition

D28 Payment and fees for the processing and assessment are justified

D29 BERDE Program supports the development programs of the National

D30 BERDE Program works hand-in-hand with Policy Development and

Programs toward sustainability in the Construction Industry D31 BERDE applies and encourages the current best practices in the green building industry

D32 BERDE User Guide V 4.2.0 makes it possible to perform a good assessment of the building

D33 The Star, Scores, and Assessment is a good scale for BERDE award certification

D34 BERDE is a reliable GBRS for the Philippines

D35 BERDE Award Certification builds trust and confidence among project stakeholders D36 BERDE Certification Award is a marketing tool

BERDE project allows you to showcase your leadership in sustainability through unbiased, balanced, and impartial assessment and certification of your building performance

After making the initial questionnaire, 39 descriptive points were made The first version of this part of the questionnaire was forwarded to professionals for a double check and review about its appropriateness in summarizing the vital descriptions of a good GBRS User Guide Inputs from them were condensed into the final version of the questionnaire, which rounds up to 37 essential and valid baseline description points

3.2.2 Part III and IV: Sustainability Factors

Different GBRS has different ways of quantifying buildings' “green” qualities Most GBRS is designed to fully accommodate local conditions such as weather, legislative considerations, local construction industry, raw materials production, etc As all these parameters cannot be included in the questionnaire, only the concepts relevant to the Philippines as deemed by green professionals are used Based on the parameters used in this GBRS and the other recommended sustainability factors by published academic papers and research, the summary is shown in Table 3-2

Table 3-2 Sustainability Factors of BERDE

S3 Use of Sustainable Materials [54] [55] [56] S4 Interior Design / Indoor Environment [57] [58] [59]

S8 Human Comfort / Occupant's Behavior and Feedback [68] [69] [70] S9 Health, Well-being, and Safety [71] [72] [73]

S11 History and Heritage Conservation and

S14 Economic Contribution of the Project [84] [85]

S17 Disaster Proofing and Resiliency [91] [92] S18 Life Cycle and Assessment [93] [94]

S25 Pre-construction Condition of the

In the questionnaire design stage, the initial version includes 38 items For the questionnaire evaluation, GBRS professionals were consulted to check for the content of the first version They were tasked to evaluate the questionnaire in terms of the question syntax and design, technical terminology, and words, whether it addressed all potential challenges, and whether any factors could be added to or removed A list of approved sustainability factors was eventually accepted; some were eliminated or combined The sustainability factors that didn’t make the final version of the questionnaires include construction cost, operational cost, maintenance cost, architectural aesthetics, adaptability for future improvement, safety and durability, building information and design process, and regional priority Professionals mentioned that these concepts overlapped the other concepts and thus might be troubling during data analysis

After the final list is made, it is cross-referenced to the latest BERDE User Guide The cross-referencing aims to check whether the final list of sustainability factors is at least mentioned in BERDE The sub-categories from the User Guide related to and co-discussing the questionnaire’s final sustainability factors list are enumerated in the third column of Table 3-3 This table helps further assess BERDE given this initial list of essential sustainability factors

Table 3-3 Cross-referencing of Questionnaire’s Sustainability Factors with

Code Category Description in BERDE User

S1 Gas Emissions (Carbon Dioxide) LE-07, MT-02, TR-01, TR-02,

Adjacent Communities MN-02, LE-05, TR-02 S3 Use of Sustainable Materials MT-01, MT-02, MT-03, EM-02

MN-07, LE-09, HW-02, HW-05, HW-06, HW-07, HW-08, HW-09

Code Category Description in BERDE User

S5 Outdoor Environment (Amenities and Facilities)

LE-06, LE-07, LE-08, TR-01, TR-02, TR-04, TR-05, HW-03,

S6 Visual Comfort TR-05, HW-01, HW-02, HW-03,

S7 Corporate Social Responsibility MN-02, MN-05, MT-03, CE-01,

MN-06, MN-07, TR-03, HW-02, HW-03, HW-04, HW-05

S9 Health, Well-being, and Safety LE-05, LE-06, LE-09, HW-02,

Conservation and Promotion MT-03, CE-02

S12 Olfactory Comfort HW-06, HW-07, HW-08

Project LE-03, EO-01 EO-02, EO-03

S15 Use of Smart Technology TR-03

S16 Building Performance (Operation and Management) MN-07, CE-01

S17 Disaster Proofing and Resiliency HW-07, HW-12

Code Category Description in BERDE User

S18 Life Cycle and Assessment MN-03, HW-09

S19 Sustainable Innovations WT-03, HW-10, EM-02

S20 Integrative Design Process MN-01, MN-03, MT-01, HW-09

S23 Location and Linkages LE-01, LE-04, CE-01

S24 Land Use LE-01, LE-02, HW-10

S25 Pre-construction Condition of the

LE-08, EN-01, EN-02, TR-02, TR-03, TR-05, HW-02

S27 Material Efficiency MT-01, MT-02, MT-03

S29 Water Conservation, Efficiency, and Management LE-08, WT-01, WT-03

The two previous lists (Table 3-1 and Table 3-2): Description of BERDE and the Sustainability factors are used for Part II, III, and IV of the Questionnaire Further explanation about utilizing these lists is explained in the next section.

Data Collection

The final version of the questionnaire is distributed through an electronic google form on two social media platforms: Facebook and Twitter Other researchers and academicians were provided with a fillable pdf version of the questionnaire through e-mail Out of 95 emails and google form invites, only 70 were answered thoroughly The primary data used for this research is based on the 70 datasets collected As mentioned earlier in this Chapter, the questionnaire has four parts The description for each part is shown below

The first part of the questionnaire is designed to obtain the survey group’s characteristics The first part is used to identify the general description of each surveyee who participated in this study The questions asked under this part include the Level of Education (Bachelor’s Degree, Master’s Degree, Doctoral Degree, And Post-Doctoral Degree), Years Of Experience (0-3 Years, 3-5 Years, 5-10 Years, More Than Ten Years), Role (Student, Researcher, Policy Developer, Engineer,

Architect, Professor), Occupation (Research Institution, GBRS Professionals,

Consultant, Design Team, Construction Team, Project Management Team), Type of

Employment (Public, Private and NGO), Field of Specialty (Policy Development,

Design And Innovation, And Construction and Post-Evaluation) And Involvement

In Sustainable Building (Barely Involved, Involved and Highly Involved)

3.3.2 Part II: Baseline Descriptions of BERDE

The second part of the Questionnaire uses the 37-point list in Table 3-1 This list will be used with a five-point Likert Scale, as shown in the scale in Table 3-4 The scale is an agreement-based scale that can measure how these descriptions are deemed to be applied on BERDE

Table 3-4 Questionnaire Part II Scale

Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

3.3.3 Part III: Sustainability Factors of BERDE

For the third part of the questionnaire, Table 3-2, with 30 sustainability factors, was presented so that each surveyee would score based on a five-point Likert similar to the last part Each surveyee will answer how they think and understand BERDE’s inclusion of each sustainability factor solely based on the User Guide

Table 3-5 Questionnaire Part III Scale

Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

3.3.4 Part IV: Level of Importance of Each Concept of Sustainability

The fourth part of the questionnaire is unrelated to BERDE or any other GBRS Instead, it is designed to get the surveyed's opinion regarding the importance of each concept as a sustainability factor, the same factors shown in Table 3-2 The scale used for this is shown in Table 3-6

Table 3-6 Questionnaire Part IV Scale

Qualitative Analysis

The questionnaire is designed using Likert-type Items The guide made by J.S Uebersax is used to construct the initial questionnaire This ensures that the questionnaire utilizes the Likert Scale in a well-designed and balanced manner [119]

As there might be confusion with Likert and Likert-type items, Likert-type items are single questions that use Likert response alternatives In contrast, Likert scales are composed of multiple Likert-type items combined during the data analysis [120]

Using the mean for an ordinal scale is deemed ineffective in describing the results of a data set obtained using the Likert Scale [121] These measures are more appropriate for tests with an absolute value, not those within the ordinal scale In replacement, using the mode and median is recommended These values use the Likert Scale, assuming that, although presented under rank order, they are not of equal intervals and will be wrong to assume otherwise However, for Likert-type items, as each question signifies separation from other items, usage of mean is recommended [122]

For this study, the measures of Central Tendency will use mean for the analysis as Likert-type items were utilized

Relative Importance Index (RII) is a non-parametric technique used to determine factors' relative importance in a given data set [123] While utilizing the same Likert Scale shown in Table 3-4 and Table 3-5, the RII can be calculated using the equation below:

W is the weighting equivalent to each factor;

A is the highest weight on the scale, and;

N is the total number of respondents

The value of RII ranges from zero (not inclusive) to one, wherein one shows that it is more significant [124]

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) is often used to reduce an extensive data set classified under j categories into smaller k latent factors under generated theory [125] EFA is performed using the data gathered for the fourth part of the questionnaire The factor analysis is performed using IBM SPSS software, including the outer measurement model assessment, Confirmative Factor Analysis (CFA) The Reliability Analysis function of SPSS is utilized to get the final processed data Principal Axis factoring is used as the extraction method

Parameters such as Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient are also calculated as part of the reliability statistics of the resulting data set Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient ranges from 0-1 with interpretations of > 0.9 (Excellent), > 0.8 (Good), > 0.7 (Acceptable),

> 0.6 (Questionable), > 0.5 (Poor), and < 0.5 (Unacceptable) [126] The number of items also affects Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient correlatively The items with unacceptable (less than 0.7) Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient are to be removed, but for this study, no values were removed

Regarding the factorability of the dataset, Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity and Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Test are used Bartlett’s Test checks if the observed variable is intercorrelated based on the observed correlation matrix and the identity matrix For this, the p-value used is 0.00, will mean that it is statistically significant The accepted value for Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity is less than 0.05 The KMO measures the suitability of the gathered data to undergo a factor analysis by checking the adequacy of the variable in completing a final model The KMO value ranges from 0 to 1, with results less than 0.6 deemed inadequate

3.4.4 Structural Equation Model: Outer Measurement Model Assessment

Confirmative (others use Confirmatory) Factor Analysis (CFA) is performed as the outer measurement model assessment It is used to ensure that the sustainability factors are appropriately paired with each component there are coupled to into based on the results of the EFA CFA is used to test the if there are already pre-existing rationales about how the factors should be designated under different components [125] Some confirmatory parameters needed for CFA are the: communality value, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, composite reliability, and average variance extracted

The communality value must exceed the threshold of 0.700 The Cronbach’s α coefficient, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE) should also not be greater than 0.6, 0.7, and 0.5 [90] [91], respectively

3.4.5 Structural Equation Model: Path Model

Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) is a type of modeling that utilizes a multivariate statistical framework to identify the complex relationships between latent variables [127] IBM SPSS AMOS is used to get the path model for SEM The model is used to estimate the fit of the hypothesized causal model through a representation of path models A representative model will be used initially, but it will be modified based on the results of different model tests Revision of the model will take place until convergence is achieved.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Analysis of Part I: Respondents' Socio-Demographics

The survey was able to gather 70 respondents The profile of the respondents, based on the descriptive parameters enumerated in the previous section, can be seen in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 It must be known that since BERDE is not yet widely known, many of the respondents are from similar institutions and lines of work (e.g., the University of the Philippines and BERDE Professionals)

Most respondents are professors, researchers, and students associated with the academe, composing almost half (47.1%) of the entire demographics A large percentage of the surveyees are also working on GBRS In terms of specialty, there is an almost equal distribution of surveyees, with 22 specializing in policy development As this research focuses on developing BERDE, feedback and recommendations for policy developers are highly encouraged

Table 4-1 Socio-demographic Characteristics (Np) (a)

Role n% Occupation n% Field of Specialty n%

Architect 15.7 Construction Team 11.4 Construction and Post-

Consultant 5.7 Consultancy 11.4 Design and Innovation 37.1 Engineer 14.3 Design Team 21.4 Policy Development 31.4

Other socio-demographic characteristics gathered from the surveyees are also listed in Table 4-2 The notable data gathered is the involvement of the surveyees in sustainable buildings Almost half, 45.7%, of the respondents, are highly involved with this type of building These results are expected because, in other socio- demographic parameters, many respondents are also affiliated with GBRS

Table 4-2 Socio-demographic Characteristics (Np) (b)

Level of Education n% Years of

Bachelor's Degree 17.1 0-3 years 28.6 Barely Involved 30.0 Master's Degree 25.7 3-5 years 27.1 Involved 24.3 Doctore Degree 22.9 5-10 years 24.3 Highly Involved 45.7 Post-Doctoral Degree 34.3 More than ten years 20.0

Below are the notes made from some of the observations from the two previous tables

• In the first parameter (role), around 20% were students This is equivalent to

14 students Among these, one is for Bachelor’s degree, three is for Master’s degree, three is for Doctorate Degree, and seven with Post-Doctoral degree

• For the fourth parameter Years of Experience was asked in the context of working in the construction industry post-latest educational degree Among the 20 respondents, only three have this experience after Bachelor’s degree The rest of the respondents have higher education experience (Master’s Degree (6), Doctorate Degree (7), and Post-Doctorate Degree (4))

• Involvement in Sustainable Building is in the context of design and construction Only 5 are architects (2) and engineers (3) Most are students of higher education (5), policy developers (4), researchers (3), consultants (3), and professors (1).

Analysis of Part II: Baseline Descriptions of BERDE

The second part of the questionnaire is designed to gather information about how the BERDE users perceive the BERDE User Guide as a document for acquiring the BERDE certification According to Luu et al., on a five-point Likert Scale, those with RII higher than 0.7 and a mean higher than 3.5 can be considered critical and, therefore, are adequate to proceed for consideration [128] The results for the second part of the questionnaire are shown in Table 4-3

However, since the Likert Scale is assigned based on the level of agreement of the surveyees and dictates a positive note on BERDE User Guide’s configuration, those outside these values for RII (less than 0.7) and mean (less than 3.5) will be considered for the comparative literature review of the User Guide These are all highlighted in red in the same table Also, in the same table, the ranking of each description is shown Those from rank 23 rd until 37 th are critical for review and reassessment

Table 4-3 Mean and RII of Part II Questionnaire

Code Descriptions Mean RII Ranking

D1 The explanation of the purpose and intent is very detailed 3.70 0.74 20

D2 The adaptation of eleven core frameworks is valid 3.81 0.76 17

D3 The eleven categories are important parameters for green construction and sustainability 4.17 0.83 3

The compliance requirements for credit distribution support the purpose and intent of all

D5 The compliance requirements can be attained at a considerable cost 2.70 0.54 32

Code Descriptions Mean RII Ranking

The compliance requirements ensure that the project also follows national and local policies, laws, and regulations

The compliance requirements are adequate to provide a good assessment and feedback regarding the building's green building initiatives

D8 The compliance requirements are manageable for the project team to obtain 2.61 0.52 33

D9 The compliance requirements are updated and are still effective during the conduct of this study 2.97 0.59 29

D10 Simultaneous acquisition of the compliance requirements is manageable 2.44 0.49 35

The compliance requirements for BERDE can be complied with by all local contractors (small, medium, and big)

D12 The documents linked in the BERDE User Guide

(V 4.2.0) are useful in assuring compliance 3.17 0.63 26

The details, content, and requirements are explained well in the BERDE User Guide V

Following the BERDE User Guide, V 4.2.0 can ensure the compliance of the building under the eleven core frameworks

D15 Continuity can be observed between Stage 1 and

Stage 2 as shown in BERDE User Guide V.4.2.0 4.26 0.85 1.5

Code Descriptions Mean RII Ranking

D16 Stages 1 and 2 are designed to adapt well to the local green building industry 3.53 0.71 22

D17 Stages 1 and 2 are updated with the current green building and sustainability trends 3.60 0.72 21

D18 The Credit Distribution, the credit score, and corresponding requirements are justified 3.14 0.63 27

The compliance requirements and their corresponding credit score are correlatively matched

D20 Getting credit scores for BERDE is manageable 3.34 0.67 24

The minimum requirements, requirements, and compliance notes are relevant documents needed to prove the building's compliance with sustainability

D22 The credit score for each core framework is justified and well-distributed 3.86 0.77 14

D23 The economic costs needed for the compliance requirements are justified 2.21 0.44 37

The presentation of modals and auxiliary models is well-defined and does not cause any inconsistency or vagueness

D25 BERDE provides positive brand recognition 3.44 0.69 23

The core framework used by BERDE covers all important green building and sustainability concepts

Code Descriptions Mean RII Ranking

D27 BERDE User Guide V 4.2.0 provides an adequate explanation for the award acquisition 3.87 0.77 13

D28 Payment and fees for the processing and assessment are justified 3.30 0.66 25

D29 BERDE Program supports the development programs of the National Government 3.99 0.80 10

BERDE Program works hand-in-hand with

Policy Development and Programs toward sustainability in the Construction Industry

D31 BERDE applies and encourages the current best practices in the green building industry 3.80 0.76 18

D32 BERDE User Guide V 4.2.0 makes it possible to perform a good assessment of the building 3.97 0.79 11.5

D33 The Star, Scores, and Assessment is a good scale for BERDE award certification 3.84 0.77 15 D34 BERDE is a reliable GBRS for the Philippines 4.11 0.82 6

D35 BERDE Award Certification builds trust and confidence among project stakeholders 4.03 0.81 8 D36 BERDE Certification Award is a marketing tool 2.59 0.52 34

BERDE project allows you to showcase your leadership in sustainability through unbiased, balanced, and impartial assessment and certification of your building performance

Reviewing the results of the second part, those descriptions that ranked low are mostly covered under similar general considerations: manageability of the compliance requirements, economic cost and viability, brand recognition and marketability, and awarding and credit distribution Among the 15 descriptions that have low mean, nine descriptions show intense disappointment over the compliance requirements’ manageability (D20, D9, D30, D19, D5, D8, D10, D11, D23), while three of these nine descriptions are related to the compliance requirements’ costs (D5, D11, D23) If one got hold of the BERDE Certification, given its promised list of incentives, it is not sufficient, given the long list of compliance requirements, to achieve a passing score The list of requirements, just the minimum system requirements, is shown in Table 2-5 and Table 2-6 Since BERDE encourages small, medium, and large construction projects to acquire BERDE, it seems like the requirements are burdensome, financially and practically, to be gathered, prepared, and achieved As listed in the two tables, many requirements are documents that can only be attained from Local Government Units (LGUs) and other third-party private sectors Being over-reliant on other entities during the certification preparation makes it quite challenging for the project team to organize acquisition properly The involvement of third-party entities makes BERDE User Guide appear fragmented and less coordinated [34] The cost of deals and arrangements with these entities also entitles them to financial support, thus adding to the financial strain from the compliance requirements

Regarding financial strain, it must be noted that D5, D11, and D23, all related to financial costs, ranked 32 nd , 36 th, and 37 th in this questionnaire, respectively This ranking means that the BERDE users are taken aback by the large financial budget needed to attain the certification On average, a LEED certification can be attained at around 2.3% of the total cost for design costs, commissioning, documentation fees, and energy modeling [129] However, it must be noted that this percentage only takes up the soft costs and excludes those actual construction costs that make the “green” qualities of the building compliant with the GBRSs For any project, this percentage can already pay the third-party consultant These are just some points raised during the post-interview with the experts regarding the financial burden of the certification acquisition

Another observation from the results is BERDE's brand recognition and marketability Among those with the lowest mean and RII, three descriptions mention this, namely D25, D37, and D36 One of the promotional stands mentioned by BERDE on its website is the certification can serve as a “credible marketing tool with a positive marketing advantage” [15] However, based on how the users see BERDE, it seems like the award is not as prestigious as the brand promotes The PHILGBC must impose new marketing and promotional activities for the certification to be more effective in brand recognition.

Research Hypotheses

Using the third and the fourth part of the questionnaire, the following hypotheses are devised:

• Hypothesis #1: There is an existing miscommunication gap between the

BERDE Version 4.2.0 and how the Filipino masses view green buildings in the Philippines

• Hypothesis #2: The boxed standard features of green buildings are still perceived to be in blur areas; thus, BERDE Version 4.2.0 requires more development

• Hypothesis #3: Under varying concepts of sustainability, prioritization of one causes a significant impact, both negatively and positively, on the other features.

Analysis of Part III and Part IV: Ranking of the Concepts

Two sets of data ranked based on the mean score: (1) Based on the sustainability factors’ inclusion in the BERDE User Guide (Part III) and (2) the Level of Importance of each sustainability concept as deemed by the surveyees (Part IV) The ranking is performed after confirming the Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient of both questionnaires at 0.795 and 0.748 These two (2) values are both at an acceptable level of reliability (0.70 to 0.95) Thus, resulting in the detailed ranking in Table 4-4

Table 4-4 Ranking of Sustainability Factors based on Mean

S8 Human Comfort / Occupant's Behavior and

S9 Health, Well-being, and Safety 3 1

S11 History and Heritage Conservation and

S14 Economic Contribution of the Project 22 25

S25 Pre-construction Condition of the

Out of the 30 concepts, four (4) from each part are not included in the other The concepts in the Top 10 are highlighted in the same table Most of these are related to resource management Among the five sustainability concepts of resource management, only S27 is not included but was replaced with S3 instead During the data collection, questions from the surveyees were raised regarding the difference between these two concepts It is in the author’s best effort to explain the extent of each concept to these questions thoroughly Health, well-being, and safety also ranked the highest collectively in both surveys This highlights some alignment in the perception of the BERDE developers with the public

The four new concepts are (ranked from highest to lowest) S4, S10, S24, and S27 These concepts provided significant credits from BERDE (Version 4.2.0) However, the exciting outtake of these is the answers from the respondents The third highest mean for the third questionnaire is from S17 There is a rise in the acknowledgment of incorporating disaster-proofing as an additional measurable characteristic of green sustainable buildings Many researchers are challenging the functionality of green construction and architecture in terms of disaster resiliency As S27 ranks third to the last (28th) for the second questionnaire, incorporating the two concepts can be considered an extra incentive similar to the concepts of History and Heritage Conservation and Promotion in BERDE’s previous versions S22 also ranked high in the third questionnaire but last in the second Climate Considerations is described as the prioritization of the varying season and weather conditions in the Philippines in designing green buildings Given that the country is highly affected by diverse weather forecasts (averaging 20 typhoons a year), it is not surprising that people view climate considerations as a green building concept

S10 topped the survey for Part II Notably, transportation takes 15 points (11%) in the maximum credit score for BERDE, which is high compared to other core framework categories But this category ranked only 14 th in the next The Philippines’ transportation network is inefficient and ineffective in management and movement Therefore, it is recommended that there should be a review of whether this concept should be ideal to be considered as one of the highest-scoring core framework categories, given that this factor is typically not solely controlled by the project owner.

Analysis of Part IV: Descriptive Analysis

The data collected from Part IV is processed to get the parameters such as minimum, maximum, mode, mean, median, and mode for each sustainability factor Most of the SFs have been covering a three-point range between the minimum and maximum score given by the respondents in a single SF

Table 4-5 Analysis of Data: Min, Max, Mean, Median, and Mode

Code Sustainability Factor Min Max Mean Med Mode

S8 Human Comfort / Occupant's Behavior and Feedback 3 5 4.44 5 5

S9 Health, Well-being, and Safety 3 5 4.66 5 5

Code Sustainability Factor Min Max Mean Med Mode

S11 History and Heritage Conservation and

S14 Economic Contribution of the Project 2 4 3.01 3 4

Code Sustainability Factor Min Max Mean Med Mode

S25 Pre-construction Condition of the

Using the data above, it can be seen that the respondents have a varying degree of importance for each SF as shown by the values between the minimum and maximum Also, the variability in numerical values for mean, mode, and median shows the spreading out of the answers by the respondents.

Analysis of Part IV: Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Before applying the factor analysis, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was applied The results for the KMO are 0.764, which are accepted values (over 0.5) The significance for Bartlett’s is below 0.05 Therefore, these findings suggest a substantial correlation in the data Doing the EFA led to the extraction of the 30 concepts of sustainability into six components, as shown in Figure 4-1

Table 4-6 Results of EFA for Sustainability Factors based on Level of Importance

The first component is composed of concepts under Resource Management and Environment Notably, these concepts are also included as sub-categories of BERDE Each of these has at least a 3-point credit score Component A's first component has concepts that account for the highest variance at 34.511 But Component B shows varying concepts such as design and construction, land management, and economics

In terms of diversity in concept, this component covers it the most compared to the other five There is also an underlying financial causation among these concepts as the economic viability and contribution are under this component Component C includes only socio-cultural concepts, while Component D is also solely composed of concepts under design and construction Component E is mainly location-related concepts: climate considerations, thermal comfort, location, and linkages The last component comprises resource management concepts connected to water: Water Conservation, Efficiency and Management, and Wastewater Management The variance for this questionnaire is high, gaining a cumulative variance of 91.88%

When the average ranking significance of each component is calculated based on the number of items under each, Component F is deemed the most significant This is expected given that, aside from only having two items under this component, water- related problems are highly viewed as a priority in the Philippines This least significant component is the second one, Component B The low ranking of economic viability and economic contribution affected the general significance of this component, despite having Land Use (ranked at 7) as part of it.

Analysis of Part IV: Outer Measurement Model Assessment

CFA is performed to recheck the appropriateness of each concept relative to each component it is coupled The communality value must exceed the threshold of 0.700, wherein both results show exceedance to this value, with the minimum being 0.771 Therefore, no item should be removed The Cronbach’s α coefficient, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE) are shown in Table 4-7 As the AVE values are above 0.7, the six components are grouped very well [130] A similar observation is made from CR, wherein the acceptable value is greater than 0.7 for the six components [130] These observations show that the sustainability factors within each specific component are related to each other and are correlated Based on the values of these parameters, the collected data, and the result of the EFA, it is regarded that there is strong convergent validity and internal consistency

Table 4-7 Cronbach's Alpha, AVE, and CR of Part IV

Analysis of Part IV: SEM Path Model

Using the results of the previous statistical tests, SPSS AMOS is used to get the path model for the SEM The model used is shown in Figure 4-1 This is designed assuming that all components are expected to affect one another but to varying degrees The model fit for the Chi-square value is used The results show that the minimum discrepancy over the degree of freedom (CMIN/DF) is at 2.468(after the application of Modification Indices), which is less than five and is considered to be an acceptable fit [131] for the model Other measures of a good model fit, the list, and its corresponding recommended values are shown in Table 4-8 Other model fit includes Goodness-of-fit Index (GFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index, and Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)

Table 4-8 Guide for Fit Indices [132]

Indices Recommended Value Source(s) Value obtained

CMIN/df Less than 5 Marsh and Hocevar (1985) 2.468

GFI resulted in 0.877; this value is close to 0.90 Notably, GFI’s value depends on the sample size [133] The CFI value is close to 0.9, which shows a relatively good fit [134] For TLI, the value should be strictly 0.9 to have a good fit However, in many model fits, there is already an acceptable fit The thresholds for this model are attained after modification indices are applied These SPSS AMOS suggestions helped identify the discrepancies between the proposed and estimated models Using this model, each component affects each concept significantly since all p-values are smaller than 0.001 This shows that the null hypothesis is rejected (Null Hypothesis: Observed Difference is due to chance) The standardized regression weights (beta/path coefficient) also show a high effect size between each component and concept

Figure 4-1 CFA using SPSS AMOS Model

Based on the AMOS Output, each of the six components in the EFA is significantly affecting the items used for Part IV The model shows standardized estimates Based on the correlation among the six latent components, some have a negative correlation while some show a positive correlation However, not all correlation values are high According to previous research, the values of correlation can be interpreted as 0.9- 1.0: very highly correlated; 0.7-0.8: highly correlated; 0.5-0.7: moderately correlated; and lastly, 0.3-0.5 have low correlation [135] No component is found to be very highly correlated However, Component B (Design and Construction) and Component D (Building Improvement and Enhancement) are highly correlated Those that are moderately correlated are Component A (Environmental Resources and Management) with Component F (Water Resources and Management) and Component E (Location and Climate) Component F and Component E are also within the range of being moderately correlated Those with low correlation are Components A and D, Components B and F, Components A and B, and Components

Confirmation of Hypotheses

All three hypotheses are accepted based on the data analysis results

• Hypothesis #1: In line with Research Objective #1, based on Section 4.4, there is a huge discrepancy between the ranking of Part III and Part IV’s results This discrepancy shows how the public's perception of the sustainability factors and how they affect green building construction is not in line with the latest BERDE User Guide version

• Hypothesis #2: Translating the resulting values shown in Table 4-5, the answer of the respondents is quite spread out within the five-point scale This signifies that the surveyees have varying perceptions over what defines sustainability when expressed in terms of green qualities

• Hypothesis #3: Using the results of the SEM, the significant impact of each concept relative to its components is confirmed The interrelationship between each factor can, either negatively or positively, affect each other at varying degrees.

Comparative Literature Analysis

BERDE User Guide is the primary document for the implementation of the plans and programs of PHILGBC The 511-page document is reviewed in cross-reference with other published documents such as (but not limited to): National Building Code, LEED User Guide, existing laws and regulations related to water resources and environment, and others The complete list of addenda recommended upon review is enumerated in Chapter 6 of this research The identified gaps during the literature review can be rounded up to 11 significant observations, as listed below 3

4.10.1 Adaptation to the Philippines' Local Green Building Culture

The primary models used for the design of BERDE are those GBRS that already exist, like LEED and BREEAM But these GBRS are designed to suit the local green building culture in the United States of America and the United Kingdom, respectively Therefore, some points are raised to be reviewed regarding the suitability of the BERDE’s regulations to the local construction culture in the Philippines

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in MT-02:

The definition of being locally manufactured is 160 km by BERDE This parallels the 100 miles consideration under LEED Green Building Rating

System In LEED, the locally manufactured materials are extracted, processed, and manufactured locally at 100 miles However, the restriction of BERDE is only those manufactured within this radius

Further explanation of this categorization is needed for this sub-category

3 The sample observations and recommendations are copied from CHAPTER 6: Error! Reference source not f ound These are also displayed along with the complete BERDE User Guide Addenda in the sample table to be more inclusive of the products that can be called locally manufactured

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in HW-10:

Hydroponics is a rising horticulture in the Philippines However, it is only mentioned in HW-09 are the land requirement is the basis of scoring Hydroponics utilizes a water system, thus, is not requiring land area Other than land area, hydroponic agriculture follows the purpose and intent of HW-09 Adding the possibility of hydroponics by construction projects will make BERDE more inclusive

4.10.2 Relativity to Green Construction and Sustainability

Sustainability and green construction have very diverse and vast definitions There are still many issues about what practices are precisely sustainable A review of these concepts is recommended

Sample observation and recommendation for Core Framework 8:

Mainly in the sub-categories written under the Core Framework of

Health and Well-being, the focus was on the users' comfort Therefore, the trade-off with economic costs and other social repercussions in producing these materials might be neglected

4.10.3 Relevancy of Content and Requirements

Aside from the minimum system requirements listed in Table 2-5 and Table 2-6, additional requirements are enumerated under each sub-category Since it is raised in the analysis in Section Part II: Baseline Descriptions of BERDE3.3.2 about the requirements gaps, more focus is given to the lists of requirements and compliance notes These observations regarding the lack of addenda and not updated content in the current version are also mentioned

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in HW-04:

It is mentioned in the Requirements section that a document must be used as a reference, as shown in Figure 0-8 But this reference was already renewed in 2020 The 2020 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 incorporates eight published addenda to the 2017 edition [136]

Figure 4-2 Reference for Reasonable Thermal Levels, HW-04

4.10.4 Consistency with other documents, regulations, and laws

Similar to the adaptation to the Philippines’ Local Green Building Culture, some parts of the User Guide refer to foreign documents despite having published Philippine Standards There are some differences in values for some foreign references and the Philippines as the local laws and regulations are redesigned to suit the application for local projects

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in TR-05:

The exact section mentions that the walkways should be designed “in accordance to generally-accepted standards for accessibility.” Instead of using this term, it is more helpful for the user to mention the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) requirements and the National

Building Code concerning the design of transport utilities

4.10.5 Effectiveness as a Guide for Applicants

The BERDE User Guide aims to quickly guide the developers in attaining the BERDE Certification Therefore, there shouldn’t be any problems or confusion that will arise when applying But during the review, there are multiple instances wherein confusion arises since there is no consistency in the content in the context of each sub-category

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in MN-04:

The requirement for getting the 3-credit scores for MN-04 is a previous green building certification The User Guide specifies these to be either a BERDE GBRS or any GBRS duly recognized by a member of the NGBC and WorldGBC However, it must be noted that even though these councils are accepted as members, there are still notable differences in these GBRS, either with each other or with BERDE itself Some of these GBRS revolve around the difference in baseline acceptable values and threshold for issues like Energy Targets For example, LEED uses cost reduction to measure energy targets while BREEAM uses reduction in CO 2 emissions

[137] These differences are not quantifiable by just having the certification itself Also, most of these GBRS are designed to be localized to the country it is created from Sustainability is rooted in locality, meaning a sustainable structure in the Philippines might not be sustainable in Australia

It is also raised in Section 3.3.2 that BERDE requires many documentations This is one of the significant challenges why local developers prefer foreign GBRS The foreign GBRS and local GBRS has almost similar requirements, but foreign GBRS has a more prominent brand power and marketability The BERDE’s requirements and compliance notes are reviewed in cases of repetitiveness and easiness of acquisition

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in WT-01:

Two documents are required under WT-01, Water Base Case and Water Design Case However, when these two documents are expounded about their content, it entails almost similar data The two screen captures of these, as shown in the BERDE User Guide, can be found below

Figure 4-3 Requirements for Water Base Case (Left) and Water Design Case

Figure 0-3 shows the repetitive requirements that affect the manageability of attaining scores under this sub-category It might be possible for the PHILGBC to combine these two documents into one requirement

4.10.7 Rationality of the Content and Coverage

The rationale behind the introduction of each sub-category is challenged during the literary analysis BERDE is still developing, so users must have complete faith in its application

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in HW-03:

In the Compliance Notes for Stages 1 and 2, BERDE requires the applicants to pass a report about the percentage of total floor area However, there are different values related to the total floor area It can be the total gross floor area, and it can also be the total net floor area To avoid confusion, it should be clarified what the total floor area is for BERDE

Sample observation and recommendation as shown in HW-06:

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

Recommendations for the Improvement of BERDE User Guide Version 4.2.0…

Using the results identified from this study, some recommendations that can be incorporated in the next version of the User Guide are listed below

• Review of the Credit Scores per Core Framework

There is an unequal distribution of scores among the current 11 core frameworks The maximum-scoring core framework, Health and Well-being, has 33 points, and the lowest-scoring core framework, Waste Management, has 3 points The 30-point difference encourages the developer to focus less on the project's waste management practices Although it is hard to remove the large score disparity altogether, putting the score difference to at least 6-9 points will lessen the developer’s bias of prioritization The PHILGBC should lead the review of the score distribution

• Regular Meetings for the Evaluation, Assessment, and Review of the BERDE User Guide

Concerning the previous recommendation, a regular meeting for the BERDE User Guide’s evaluation, assessment, and review must be done This meeting will ensure that the content of the user guide and the ongoing programs and plans under the PHILGBC will be updated with the new research about sustainable green buildings

As sustainability is a growing research field, many new studies have popped up and will significantly help BERDE's future development

• Invitation for Inter-disciplinary Collaboration

Sustainability is a field of science built through interdisciplinary collaboration It only makes sense for the PHILGBC to involve individuals who are experts in varying fields such as engineering, water resources, environment, economy, and policy management If the council plans to add new sustainability concepts, they must include this field’s expert in the framework design

• New Category: Innovations, Disaster-proofing and Resiliency, and Climate Considerations

Innovations have already been considered in the previous version of BERDE Adding Innovations as a credit-score-worthy concept to the User Guide might be more challenging However, this also provides the council with a more substantial input based on experience about the pros and cons of incorporating it as a category

As these two are related, adding disaster-proofing and resiliency, and climate considerations might be deemed suitable by the Council Inviting experts from the Disaster Risk and Reduction Management and Atmospheric, Geophysical, and Astronomical Services Administration will provide good insights into the importance of including these two concepts.

Recommendations for Further Study

Since BERDE is a new rating system, recommendations for further study of this GBRS are shown below

• An extensive marketing and promotional review of PHILGBC’s plans and programs can significantly help incorporate BERDE into the construction industry It is known from this study that BERDE is faced with challenges relating to it being a marketing tool Doing this extensive study can provide BERDE with a better platform

• Detailed research about the future of the Philippines’ sustainable construction industry in cross-reference on how PHILGBC can play a role in this future is also recommended As a leading institution in green buildings, PHILGBC has the role of ensuring a successful green future As young researchers and members of the academe, we are responsible for providing baseline research on achieving this kind of future for the Philippines

[1] United Nations, Our common future, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, 1987

[2] M A G von Keyserlingk, N P Martin, E Kebreab, K F Knowlton, R J Grant, M Stephenson, C J Sniffen, J P Harner, A D Wright and S I Smith,

"Invited review: Sustainability of the US dairy industry," Journal of Dairy Science, vol 96, no 9, pp 5405-5425, 19 May 2013

[3] J H Spangeberg, S Pfahl and K Deller, "Towards Indicators for Institutional Sustainability: Lessong from an Analysis of Agenda 21," Ecological Indicators, vol 2, no 1-2, pp 61-77, 14 November 2002

[4] P Guzman, "Bridging Global and Local Levels in Monitoring the Sustainable Urban Development of World Heritage Sites," M.S Thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2017

[5] K Soini, E Battaglini, I Birkeland, N Duxbury, G Fairclough, L Horlings and J Dessein, Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability, J

Dessein, K Soini, G Fairclough and L Horlings, Eds., University of Jyvaskyla, Finland, 2015

[6] R C Hill and P A Bowen, "Sustainable Construction: Principles and a Framework for Attainment," Construction Management and Economics, vol

[7] United Nations, "United Nations Sustainable Development," in United Nations Conference on Environment & Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,

[8] The World Conservation Union, United Nations Environment Programme, World Wide Fund for Nature, "Caring for the Earth A Strategy for Sustainable Living," The World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland, 1991

[9] T Novicio, "5 Biggest Industries in the World in 2021," 24 March 2021 [Online] Available: https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/5-biggest- industries-in-the-world-in-2021-925230/ [Accessed 08 June 2022]

[10] BIMHow, "Impact of the Construction Industry to the Environment," 30 May

2013 [Online] Available: www.bimhow.com/impact-of-the-construction- industry-on-the-environment

[11] S Sikra, "GoContractor," 21 June 2017 [Online] Available: https://gocontractor.com/blog/how-does-construction-impact-the- environment/ [Accessed 08 June 2022]

[12] United Nations, "We’re gobbling up the Earth’s resources at an unsustainable rate," 03 April 2019 [Online] Available: https://www.unep.org/news-and- stories/story/were-gobbling-earths-resources-unsustainable-rate [Accessed

[13] D Szerwinska, "Green building: Improving the lives of billions by helping to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals," 28 March 2017 [Online] Available: https://www.worldgbc.org/news-media/green-building- improving-lives-billions-helping-achieve-un-sustainable-development-goals [Accessed 09 June 2022]

[14] Philippine Green Building Council, "About of PGBC," 30 December 2014 [Online] Available: https://philgbc.org/about/ [Accessed 09 June 2022]

[15] BERDE, "About BERDE," 12 October 2010 [Online] Available: https://berdeonline.org/#about-berde-why-should-you-use-berde [Accessed

[16] C dela Cruz, "Project Development for Energy Efficiency and Conservation of Buildings in the Philippines," Presentation, Department of Energy, Taguig City, Philippines, 2013

[17] M L Suelto, "BERDE Program," Presentation, Philippine Green Building Council, Makati City, Philippines, 2019

[18] KMC Global Research, "Looking at LEED: Do Green Features add Value, and which Markets could benefit?," Savills, 06 September 2018 [Online] Available: https://kmcmaggroup.com/research-insights/2018/looking-at-leed- do-green-features-add-value-and-which-markets-could-benefit/ [Accessed

[19] N Corporation, "Texas Instruments building in Philippines LEED certified,"

31 March 2009 [Online] Available: https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/16791/texas-instruments-building-in- philippines-leed- certified#:~:text=Texas%20Instruments%20Incorporated%20(TI)%20on,cert ified%20building%20in%20the%20country [Accessed 23 November 2021]

[20] J Zuo and Z Y Zhao, "Green Building Research - Current Status and Future Agenda: A Review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol 30, pp 271-281, 2014

[21] Environmental Protection Agency, "Definition of Green Building," EPA, 21

February 2016 [Online] Available: https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/html/about.html [Accessed 28 January 2022]

[22] World Green Building Council, "About Green Building," Nic Lehoux , [Online] Available: https://www.worldgbc.org/what-green-building [Accessed 15 January 2022]

[23] J S Khan, R Zakaria, S M Shamsudin, N I A Abidin, S R Sahamir, D

N Abbas and E Aminudin, "Evolution to Emergence of Green Buildings: A Review," Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, vol 9, no 6, pp 1-

[24] United Nations, "Goal 11: Sustainable cities and communities," United Nations, [Online] Available: https://www1.undp.org/content/oslo- governance-centre/en/home/sustainable-development-goals/goal-11- sustainable-cities-and-communities.html [Accessed 28 January 2022]

[25] M Ives, "Singapore Takes the Lead In Green Building in Asia," Yale School of the Environment, 16 December 2013 [Online] Available: https://e360.yale.edu/features/singapore_takes_the_lead_in_green_building_i n_asia [Accessed 28 January 2022]

[26] World Green Building Council, "What is a green building rating tool?," World Green Building Council 2016-2022, [Online] Available: https://www.worldgbc.org/rating-tools [Accessed 28 January 2022]

[27] World Green Building Council, "Quality Assurance Guide for Green Building Rating Tools," World Green Building Council, Toronto, 2015

[28] International Organization for Standardization, "Quality management systems

— Requirements," ISO 9001:2015, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2008

[29] K Tang, C Foo and I Tan, "A Review of the Green Building Rating Systems," in International Conference Series of Material Science and Engineering, London, United Kingdom, 2020

[30] L Marchi, E Antonini and S Politi, "Green Building Rating Systems (GBRSs)," MDPI Encyclopedia, Bologna, Italy, pp 998-1009, 2021

[31] Department of Public Works and Highways, "Philippine Green Building

Code," 22 June 2015 [Online] Available: https://www.dpwh.gov.ph/DPWH/sites/default/files/laws_codes_orders/Pgbc Booklet23March.pdf [Accessed 28 January 2022]

[32] A D Jesus, "Philippine Green Building Code," 25 July 2015 [Online] Available: https://business.inquirer.net/195889/philippine-green-building- code [Accessed 28 January 2022]

[33] K Crismundo, "DOE requires use of solar, RE technologies in buildings," News, Philippine News Agency, Quezon City, Philippines, 2021

[34] M Franco, "Obstacles to a Green Building Sector in Metro Manila," News, Rappler, Manila, Philippines, 2021

[35] World Green Building Council, "Philippine Green Building Council," 22 April

2017 [Online] Available: https://www.worldgbc.org/member- directory/philippine-green-building-council-inc [Accessed 10 June 2022]

[36] Vietnam Green Building Council, "Understand Costs of Green Building," 05 July 2020 [Online] Available: https://vgbc.vn/en/costs-of-green-building/

[37] United States Green Building Council, LEED V4 for Building Design and Construction, Washington, DC, USA: USGBC, 2019

[38] BRE Global, BREEAM International New Construction Version 6.0 Technical Manual SD250, Watford, United Kingdom: BRE Global, 2021

[39] Department of Energy, "List of Renewable Energy Suppliers under the Green Energy Option Program," 20 December 2021 [Online] Available: https://www.doe.gov.ph/renewable-energy?q=/renewable-energy/geop

[40] E Pacquaio, "18th Congress, Senate Bill No 1309, Rain Water Harvesting Act," 03 February 2020 [Online] Available: https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/3228029128!.pdf

[41] R A Begum, S Chmahuri and J J Pereira, "Attitude and Behavioural Factors in Waste Management in the Construction Industry of Malaysia," Resources,

Conservation and Recycling, vol 6, pp 321-328, 2009

[42] C Orozco and S D Maningas, "Industry Perception on the Benefits of Construction Waste Management Strategies in the Philippines," Philippine

Engineering Journal,vol 35, no.6, pp 19-28, 2014

[43] Asian Development Bank, "Philippines: Transport Sector Assessment, Strategy and Road Map," Asian Development Bank, Mandaluyong City, Philippines, 2012

[44] World Green Building Council, "Heatlh and Wellbeing Framework: Executive Report," World Green Building Council, Toronto, Canada, 2020

[45] M Cypher and O Elamine, "Green building's conveniently ignore the emissions from their construction," 22 July 2020 [Online] Available: https://www.fastcompany.com/90657506/green-buildings-conveniently- ignore-the-emissions-from-their-construction

[46] C C d l Cruz, "Promoting Green Jobs in the Building and Construction Sector," Philippine Green Building Council, Pasay City, Philippines, 2011

[47] M T Amores, "Towards a Better Alignment of Green Building Rating Tools with Environmental Sustainability: The Case of the BERDE Green Rating System," Academia.edu, 2014

[48] O Brendan, C Macken and A Rohloff, "LEED V4 Impact Category and Point Allocation Development Process," [Online] Available: https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-v4-impact-category-and-point- allocation-process-overview [Accessed 12 December 2022]

[49] D H Aquino, C Orozco, A L Sy and H K Yap, "Study on the Relative Imporatnce of Green Building Atrributes in Philippine Urban Setting using Analytical Hierarchy Process," Semantic Scholar, Quezon City, Philippines,

[50] M Park, S Tae, S Suk, G Ford, M Smith and R Steffen, "A Study on the Sustainable Building Technologies considering to Performance of Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction," in International Conference on Sustainable Design,

Engineering and Construction, Chicago, United States, 2015

[51] E E Burg Hupp, "Refining Green Building Regulationas and Funding Green Buildings in Order to Achieve Green House Gas Reductions," The Urban Lawyer, vol 42, no 3, pp 369-648, 2010

[52] S G Dalibi, "Green Buildings: The Clients' and the End Users' Common Ground in Environmental Sustainability," M.S Thesis, NIQS National Training Workshop, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, 2014

[53] S Pullela, "Green Buildings A Step Towards Environmental Protection,"

Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering, vol 11, no 3, p 1, 25 March

[54] E Franzoni, "Materials Selection for Green Buildings: which tools for Engineers and Architects," in International Conference on Green Building and Sustainable Cities, Bologna, Italy, 2011

[55] B Lee, M Trcka and J Hensen, "Embodied Energy of Building Materials and Green Building Rating Systems - A Case Study for Industrial Halls," in 9th

International Conference on Sustainable Energy Technologies, Shanghai,

[56] K A Aghdam, A F Rad, H Shakeri and J M Sardroud, "Approching Green Buildings Using Eco-efficient Construction Materials: A Review of the State- of-the-Art," KICEM Jornal of Construction Engineering and Project Management, vol 8, no 3, 10 September 2018

[57] Z Gou, "Green Building for Office Interiors: Challenges and Opportunities,", Facilities, Vol 34 No 11/12, pp 614-629 2015

[58] Z Gou, S S.-y Lau and Z Zhang, "A Comparison of Indoor Environmental Satisfaction between Two Green Buildings and a Conventional Building in China," Journal of Green Building, vol 7, no 2, pp 89-104, 2022

[59] C Aighabavboa and W D Thwala, "Performance of a Green Building's Indoor Environmental Quality on Building Occupants in South Africa,"

Journal of Green Building, vol 14, no 1, pp 131-147, January 2019

[60] S Modirrousta and Z Mohammadi, "Necessity and Methods of Designing

Greeen Buildings in Cities and its Effect on Energy Efficiency," European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, vol 3, no.3, pp 304-315,

[61] M R M Hussain, N D Nizarudin and I Tukiman, "Landscape Design and Part of Green and Sustainable Building Design," Advances Materials Research, vol 935, pp 277-280, 2014

[62] F H Husain, A A Aziz, M Yuhaniz and S S Ahmad, "A Review of Aspects and Criteria of Daylighting and Visual Comfort in International Green Building Rating Tools," Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, vol 5, no 15, pp 151-157, 02 December 2020

[63] B J D Cadena, T Poli, M Kosir, G Lobaccaro, A G Mainini and A Speroni, "Current Trajectories and New Challenges for Visual Comfort Assessment and Building Design and Operation: A Critical Review," Applied

Sciences, vol 12, pp Basel, Switzerland, 16 March 2022

[64] J Lu, L Ren, W Lin, Y He and J Streimikis, "Policies to Promote Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Assessment of CSR Impacts," Business

Administration and Management,vol 22, no.1, pp 82-98, 2019

[65] B Xia, A Olanipekun, Q Chen, L Xie and Y Liu, "Conceptualising the state of the art of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in the Construction Industry and its nexus to sustainable development," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol 195, pp 340-353, 21 May 2018

[66] J Przychodzen and W Przychodzen, "Corporate Social Responsibility for Sustainability," Journal of Management and Business Administration, vol 22, no 2, pp 81-97, 2014

[67] S Alam and Z Islam, "Examinint the role of Envrionmental Corporate Social Responsibility in Building Green Corporate Image and Green Competitive Advantage," Internation Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, vol 6, no 8, 2021

[68] M Mohamed, "Green Building Rating Systems as design target for public building: A Case Study Analysis," Progress in Industrial Ecology - An International Journal , vol 11, no 2, pp 118-134, 2017

[69] M Khoshbakht, Z Gou, K Dupre and R Best, "Occupant Satisfaction and Comfort in Green Buildings: A Longitudinal Occupant Survey in Green Building in a Subtropical Climate in Australia," in Engaging Architectural Science: Meeting the Challenges of Higher Density: 52nd International Conference of the Architectural Science Association, Australia, 2018

[70] G Yun and J T Kim, "Creating Sustainable Building through exploiting Human Comfort," in 6th International Conference on Sustainability in Energy and Buildings, Jamshoro, Pakistan, 2014

[71] Z Gou, "Human Factors in Green Buildings: Building Types and Users' Needs," Buildings, 9 January 2019

[72] T P Obrecht, R Kunic, S Jordan and M Dovjak, "Comparison of Health and Well-being Aspects in Building Certification Schemes," Sustainability, vol

[73] J Allen, P MacNaughton, J G C Laurent, S Flanigan, E S Eitland and J Spengler, "Green Buildings and Health," Current Environment and Health Reports, pp 250-258, 2015

[74] G Li, X Ma and Y Song, "Green Building Efficiency and Influencing Factors of Transportation Infrastructure in China: Based on Three-Stage Super- Efficiency SBM-DEA and Tobit Models," Buildings, vol 16, no 623, 08 May

[75] United Nations, "Sustainable Transport, Sustainable Development Interagency report for second Global Sustainable Transport Conference," United Nations, 2021

[76] K Dhawan, J Tookey, A Ghaffarianhoseini and A GhaffarianHoseini,

"Greening Construction Transport as a Sustainability Enabler for New Zealand: A Research Framework," Frontiers in Built Environment, vol 8, 25 May 2022

[77] A Bogdan, D Chambre, D M Copolivici, T Bungau, C Bungau and L Copolovici, "Heritage Building Preservation in the Process of Sustainable Urban Development: The Case of Brasov Medieval City, Romania,"

[78] M Abou Leila and M Madkour, "Restoration Towards sustainable green heritage buildings, ,," Scientific Journal of the Faculty of Fine Arts Alexandria

[79] S Ioan and S Calin, "Olfactory Comfort Assurance in Buildings," Chemistry,

Emission Control, Radioactive Pollution and Indoor Air Quality, pp 407-428,

[80] J H B d Groot, "Smells in Sustainable Environments: The Scented Silk Road to Spending," Smells in Sustainable Environments, 2021

[81] H Hsieh, V Claresta and T M N Bui, "Green Building, Cost of Equity Capital and Corporate Governance: Evidence from US Real Estate Investment Trusts," Sustainability, vol 2, 2 May 2020

[82] D A P P Pujan Neupane, "Cost Benefit Analysis of Green Building: A Case Study of Public Office Building in Nepal," Saudi Journal of Engineering and

[83] "Analyzing the Affordability of Green Buildings," Journal of Building Construction, vol 2, no 1, pp 1-4, 2020

[84] P Eichholtz, N Kok and J Quigley, "The Economics of Green Building,"

Review of Economics and Statistics, vol 95, no 1, pp 50-63, 01 March 2013

[85] A S Weerasinghe and T Ramachandra, "Economic sustainability of green buildings: a comparative analysis of green vs non-green," Built Environment

Project and Asset Management, vol 8, no 5, pp 528-543, 2018

[86] P K D Pramanik, S Pal, B Mukherjee, T Pal and S P Singh, " Green Building Management and Smart Automation," in Green Smart Building: Requisites, Architecture, Challenges and Use Cases, IGI Global, 2020, pp 25-

[87] F Vranay, Z Vranayova, D Ocipova and D Lukasik, "Green energy and indoor technologies for smart buildings," Challenges, Opportunities and Solutions in Structural Engineering and Construction, pp 869-872, 2010

[88] L Florez, "Sustainability and Green Building Rating Systems: A Critical Analysis to Advance Sustainable Performance," Encyclopedia of Renewable and Sustainable Materials, vol 4, pp 211-220, 2020

[89] A Devine and N Kok, "Green Certification and Building Performance: Implications for Tangibles and Intangibles," The Journal of Portfolio Management, vol 41, no 6, pp 151-163, 2015

[90] K Z , J G Chenyao Shen, "An Overview of the Green Building Performance Database," Journal of Engineering, Volume 2020, Issue No.1, 21 January

[91] M Comber, S Foo, S J G Carter, P Koklanos, L Lemay, L Maclise, T Rodriguez-Nikl, M G VanGeem and M D Webster, “Disaster Resilience and Sustainability”, SEI Sustainability Committee, Disaster Resilience Working Group, 2015

[92] H Mallawarachchi, L D Silva and R Rameezedeen, "Green buildings, resilience ability and the challenge of Disaster Risk," in International Conference on Building Resilience, Ahungalla, Sri Lanka, 2013

[93] V Basten, Y Latief, M A Berawi and R Budiman, "Evaluation of Green Building Rating Tools based on Existing Green Building Achievement in Indonesia Using Life Cycle Assessment Method," in Engineering International Conference 2016, Semarang, Indonesia, 2017

[94] M Braulio-Gonzalo, A Jorge-Ortiz and M Bovea, "How are indicators in Green Building Rating Systems addressing Sustainability dimensions and life cycle frameworks in residential buildings?," Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol 95, 16 April 2022

[95] Y Lu, "Sustainability and Innovative Construction: Green Building with Concrete," Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering, vol 2, no 5, pp 2-

[96] T Ahmad, A A Aibinu and A Stephan, "Green Building Projects: Process Innovation Leading to Project Innovation," in Proceeding of the 33rd Annual

ARCOM Conference, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2017

[97] S Assefa, H.-y Lee and F.-J Shiue, "Sustainability Performance of Green Building Rating Systems (GBRS) in an Integration Model," Buildings, vol 12,

[98] Q Wen, Z Li, Y Peng and B Guo, "Assessing the Effectiveness of Building Information Modeling in Developing Green Buildings from a Lifecycle Perspective," Sustainability,vol 12, iss.23, 29 November 2020

[99] A H A Tharim, F F A Munir, M H A Samad and T Mohd, "A Field Investigation of Thermal Comfort Parameters in Green Building Index (GBI)-Rated Office Buildings in Malaysia," International Journal of Technology, vol 9, no.8, pp 1588-1596, 2018

[100] A Alabdullatief and S Omer, "Sustainable techniques for thermal comfort in buildings designed used by worshipers," in Conference: 16th International Conference on Sustainable Energy Technologies (SET2017), Bologna, Italy,

[101] S Yardimili, D G Ozer and A Shahriary, "Sustainable Street Architecture and its Effects on Human Comfort Conditions," A|Z ITU Journal of Faculty of Architecture, vol 147, no 2, pp 113-122, July 2020

[102] K H Hirokawa and A M Pohrib, "The Role of Green Building in Climate Change Adaptation," Alabny Law School, Working Series Paper No.8, 2012

[103] W S Ismaeel, "Sustainable site selection using system dynamics; case study

LEED-certified project," Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol 8, no.9, pp 1-19, 2021

[104] T Họkkinen, T Helinl, C Antuủa, S Supper, N Schiopu and S Nibel, "Land Use as an Aspect of Sustainable Building," International Journal of Sustainable Land Use and Urban Planning, vol 1, no 1, pp 21-41, 2013

[105] B Erdede and S Bektaş, "Land Management Criteria For Green Building Certication Systems In Turkey," Creative Commons, 2020

[106] L Aye and D Hes, "Green Building Rating System Scores for Building Reuse," Journal of Green Building, vol 7, no 2, pp 105-112, 2022

[107] S Junyi and C Liangjian, "Research on construction site management of green and sustainability," in 2013 International Conference on Advances in Social Science, Humanities, and Management, Guangzhou, China, 2013

[108] S Al-Ghamdi and M Bilec, "Green Building Rating Systems and Environmental Impacts of Energy Consumption from an International Perspective," in International Conference on Sustainable Infrastructure: Creating Infrastructure for a Sustainable World, Long Beach, California,

[109] A Tabrizi, "Sustainable Construction, LEED as a Green Rating System and Importance of Moving to NZEB," in 8th International Conference on Environment Pollution and Prevention, Sydney, Australia, 2020

[110] U A Umar, M F Khamidi and H Tukur, "Sustainable Building Material for Green Building Construction, Conservation and Refurbishing," in

Management in Construction Research Association (MiCRA) Postgraduate Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2012

[111] A Bonoli, S Zanni and F Serrano-Bernardo, "Sustainability in Building and Construction within the Framework of Circular Cities and European New Green Deal The Contribution of Concrete Recycling," Sustainability, vol 13, no 2139, 17 February 2021

[112] A Kasthurba, K REddy and D V Reddy, "Sustainable Approaches for Utilizing Waste in Building Construction: Two Case Studies in India,"

International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering, vol 7, no 03, pp 838-844, June 2014

[113] M.R.Nalamwar and Dr.D.K.Parbat, "Solid Waste Management in Green Building," International Journal of Research in Engineering, Science and

[114] J Al-Qawasmi, M Asif, A A E Fattah and M O Babsail, "Water Efficiency and Management in Sustainable Building Rating Systems: Examining Variation in Criteria Usage," Sustainability, vol 11, no 2416, 24 April 2019

[115] P B Oindrila Das and S Moulick, "Water Conservation Aspects of Green Buildings," International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, vol 04, no 13, pp 75-79, December 2015

[116] A M Usman and K Abdullah, "Water Management and Efficiency for Construction Industries in Green Building Rating Systems," in Proceeding –

4thd Putrajaya International Built Environment, Technology and Engineering Conference, Bangi, Malaysia, 2018

J Tookey and N A Hashim, "Application of wastewater treatment in sustainable design of green built environments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol 49, p 845–856, 2015

[118] M J Hossein Pourfakhar, "Wastewater reuse, the primary solution to sustainable development: A review on evaluating opportunities and challenges ahead," in 6th International Conference of Civil, Architectural & Environmental Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden, 2020

[119] J S Uebersax, "Likert Scales: Dispelling the Confusion," 31 August 2006 [Online] Available: https://www.john-uebersax.com/stat/likert.htm [Accessed 01 October 2022]

[120] H Boone and D Boone, "Analyzing Likert Data," Journal of Extension, vol

[121] G Sullivan and A Artino, "Analyzing and Interpreting Data from Likert-type Scales," Journal of Graduate Medical Education, vol 5, no 4, pp 541-542,

[122] University of St.Andrews, "Analysing Likert Type/Scale Data," Report, University of St.Andrews, St.Andrews, Scotland, 2020

Management

• For the building owner to qualify for the credits presented under this sub-category, a GBRS professional, either BERDE-certified or Green Building Professional (GBP), will be employed during the design and construction period The hiring of a GBP will give a three- credit score

• Compliance with this will require additional funding for the building owner The average salary for a GBP in the Philippines is around Php 30,000 (600 USD) to Php 50,000 (1000 USD) Employment of the GBP is required for at least the duration and completion of the certification process Assuming that the processing with take around five months, around Php 200,000 (4000 USD) will be added to the GBRS certification allotment

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• The employment only requires 1 GBP, as explained under Score Distribution (shown as a GBP) However, this rule doesn’t quantify the scale of the construction As completing the BERDE Certification Process requires more workforce depending on the project's extent,

PHILGBC might review this requirement and develop a more detailed Score Distribution

• Under Compliance notes, PHILGBC requires the owner to provide the “Qualifications of the professional.” However, Requirements also imply that the necessary qualifications are only their certification as either a BERDE Professional or a GBP Other qualifications, such as experiences and previous projects, might also be helpful for the assessment team

This is because GBRS professionals with more background and experience working on GBRS projects can bring more sustainable and innovative ideas

• The score distribution only has one (1) choice of credit score award: three credit scores However, for the users to strive better in getting the score, PHILGBC can design a credit distribution that is more categorized Suggested categorizations include GBP’s experience and the Number of hired GBPs

• The term “materially affected” is already used in the Purpose and Intent However, this phrase is not widely used in the Philippines However, as shown below, the phrase was at the end of Stage 1, with the link connected to an invisible rectangle

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

Figure 0-1 Invisible triangle Pop-up Link for Materially affected, MN-02

This is recommended to be linked to the actual section, which explains the definition of materially affected The explanation is also recommended to be placed before the usage of any newly introduced terms to avoid confusion

• The " materially affected " link is also not applied to all the phrases “materially affected.” For the coherence of the entire User Guide, adding links directing to its meaning must be applied

• Under Stage 2 of the BERDE User Guide, only the sentence: “The project team must implement the recommendations from the consultations.” is written This single sentence explaining the Requirements under Stage 2 makes it repulsive for the user As this is labeled a User Guide, a more detailed explanation of the requirements should be added

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• Under credit distribution, the phrase “at least three” and “at least two” while referring to economic, environmental, and social recommendations entails some confusion There can be two (2) ways to interpret this (Example is taken for a 3-credit score): (1) three recommendations of either economic, environmental, or social recommendations, or (2) three of each economic, environmental, and social recommendation Adding the adverb

“either” can help clear these instructions

• The phrase “specific requirements and recommendations from end-user” is added to the 3-credit score As this is a requirement to get the maximum score, there should be a detailed explanation of how to satisfy or prove that the requirements and recommendations were from end-users

• Under Requirements for Stage 1, it is required for the project to identify already the

“BERDE credits pursued the project.” This kind of nit-picking on what to comply with restrains the project from future innovation and other sustainable development Getting the GBRS certification will be another checklist to comply with these requirements The phrases such as: “Target Credits for BERDE and performance targets” and

“Responsibilities in preparing documentation for BERDE” should be changed into something more general instead of the implication of check listing

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• Regular charettes (design and construction) are required for stages 1 and 2 However, the frequency definition correlated to the phrase “regular” is unclear As regular can mean every day or every week, as long as there is a definite pattern, it could comply with the 3- credit scores Instead of using this adjective, a more definitive time frame (e.g., weekly, monthly) or frequency (e.g., ten charettes, five charettes) can be used

• As there will be multiple charettes, as implied by the phrase “regular charettes,” it is unclear whether complete attendance of “All members of the project team, including the project owner” is expected for all charettes If the failure to attend in one of the charettes will also entail the failure of the “Implementation of an integrated project delivery,” the users must clear this

• This sub-category focuses on the need to have a fully working management team However, although many GBRS are using management as a definitive parameter in achieving sustainability, further information, education, and campaign (IEC) on letting the public know its importance might help align BERDE with what its stakeholders know

Use of Land and Ecology

• In the Purpose and Intent, “brownfield land” is introduced However, the detailed description from BERDE is not clear A footnote might be added to identify the specific interpretation of BERDE with “brownfield land,” as this concept is defined differently from a multidisciplinary perspective Defined by Alker et al., a brownfield site is “any land or premises which has previously been used or developed and is not currently fully in use, although it may be partially occupied or utilized, may be vacant, derelict or contaminated”

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

[138] Using this definition, the phrase “previously developed land” used in the first and third bullet points overlaps with the definition of brownfield land

• Part of the requirements for Stage 1 is the employment of a qualified professional

However, further elaboration on the required “qualification” is not mentioned Clarity within the document and its corresponding compliance documents must be done to prevent the failure of credit awards

• As there are two (2) possible conditions for the site, either contaminated or not, the presentation under Requirements should be classified as under these two To note, there is a section with the introduction of “If the land is contaminated, the project team must (pg

106)” For coherence and organization’s sake, the initial section should also be introduced in this tone by adding, “if the land is not contaminated, the project team must.” This will improve and ease understanding of the sub-category by having an identifiable header

• In the Requirements Section, the phrase “site remediation and monitoring” is used, but the term “monitoring” is dropped in the score distribution for the 3-credit score under Stage 2-Construction To ensure consistency with the requirements and the score distribution, “site remediation measures” must be replaced with “site remediation and monitoring measures.”

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• This sub-category is highly dependent on using Environmentally critical areas (ECA) ECAs in the Philippines are identified under Proclamation No 2146 (including its amendments), which is enumerated and described under twelve categories As BERDE is a local GBRS, mention of this Proclamation might be helpful for the user as this will ease the identification of the ECAs Although BERDE provided its characterization of an ECA,

PD 2146 is a presidential decree, and PD 2146 supersedes this characterization

• Construction and development in ECAs are not recommended, for these can significantly induce environmental conservation and protection issues However, under the Score Distribution, a score is given when the structure for certification will be or is built on a non-ECA area despite already being advised not to by existing regulations There is redundancy with the existing law If something recommended by the National Government is followed, is it worthwhile for the Council to award credit scores?

• The main requirement under this sub-category is the implied description of the high- priority site, which is “within development areas or areas with critical development constraints.” This phrase did not specifically define the high-priority site but instead shaped it using the term “critical development constraints,” so misguided judgment from

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks the user can happen A more elaborated description of the high-priority sites might be needed to ensure clarity

• In the end part of Stage 1 (Compliance Notes), an additional guide is written wherein BERDE requires the project team is provide plans and specifications regarding additional requirements as prescribed by national and local agencies (But not written under Stage 2 Compliance Notes) It will be helpful if this note is also highlighted/added under the Requirements sections

• The BERDE-Districts Version 1.0.0 is still in the review stage, as posted by PHILGBC on its Facebook page last July 28, 2022, with the Pilot Version of the User Guide released in September 2021 This sub-category might be a little too early, considering that there is no established User Guide yet to acquire the certification Also, it is mentioned under the Requirements section of LE-04 that projects located in areas with BERDE-Districts GBRS award will be able to get the credit score distribution However, as mentioned initially, this program's system and user guide are not yet approved or in circulation The draft for Version 1.0.0 was posted by PHILGBC, open for the public’s recommendation, last August

12, 2022 There are also a few other GBRS that provides certification for Green Districts, like LEED (LEED for Cities and Communities) and BREEAM (BREEAM Communities) Under these two (2) schemes, some cities nor districts are located in the Philippines

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• The local green building of the Philippines is relatively late compared to other countries Although adding this sub-category encourages cities and districts to attain a certain level of sustainability, this might be too advanced to be added to this version Adding this sub-category might be more suitable once BERDE Districts GBRS is in total circulation or established

• Since the Certification for Green Districts is a relatively new concept for the country, this sub-category can push for the colonization of green buildings This will lead to the building being concentrated only in one area Colonization of green buildings also causes resource shortage and deficiency since there will be competition for raw green building materials

• As mentioned in the Purpose and Intent for this category, the main goal is to protect and restore the ecological feature of the project site However, how to achieve this goal is not fully encompassed by the Compliance Requirements mentioned under the same sub- category

• On page 121, the initial site assessment must show the “measures” for existing ecological features However, only three (3) were provided Instead of using “may include” (pg 121, Stage 1, No.3), it is better to change it to “may include but not limited to” to ensure clarity

• Updated Content and Requirements for Feedback and Assessment The Score

Distribution under this sub-category only requires one (1) strategy for the applicant to gain

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks one credit score Compared to other sub-categories, it seems like only one (1) strategy is less impactful than the 1-point scoring requirements from other sub-categories

Energy

• In the compliance notes section under EN-01, there are many requirements to get points under this category The primary requirements include Energy Design Case Report, Occupancy Profile, Plans, and specifications As each requirement has specific contents and usually shows the same and overlapping data about the project’s energy consumption, the council should find a way to simplify and narrow down the list of requirements

• Related to the list of requirements and additional workforce required to comply with EN-

01, all of this will add a top-up to the financial budget of the applicant The requirements can be simplified to lessen the monetary burden of this Also, as the requirements require specialization to comply and prepare, the applicants tend to hire a third-party commission consultant Hiring a third-party consultant means an additional salary budget Notably, EN-

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

01 encourages the applicant to engage a qualified professional in planning and implementing energy efficiency and conservation strategies

• Stages 1 and 2 show similar energy consumption reduction compared to the base case The pattern of 50%, 30%, and 15% is very high Since the percentage for energy consumption reduction also varies depending on the project's scale, some interviewed individuals believe that basing it on a percentage categorization is more challenging for small-to- medium companies

• The BERDE User Guide should be reviewed As this is a government document, mistakes should not be observed However, in the Compliance Notes: Stage 1-Design, the requirement of “Occupancy Profile of the Project” is repeatedly mentioned in Number 5 and Number 9 One should be removed

• Renewable Energy is a trendy term nowadays However, the Philippines is still lacking in terms of the available application As BERDE inspires to grow with the local green building culture, it is also essential to adapt and grow with it Getting the score for this sub- category is challenging as there are limited possible energy sources Also, making an on- site renewable energy source will require a sizeable financial allotment from the company

It might be too early for the PHILGBC to include this

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• The experts question the rationality of adding renewable energy as a basis of sustainability in this study Apart from the lack of possible suppliers, the system requirements are too complicated and detailed for everyone’s compliance Although the difference in percentage for the off-site and on-site sources is observed from the score distribution, a review of its applicability and functionality, dependent on the applicants, past, and future, must still be used to assess the rationale behind this sub-category

• The score distribution for all stages comprises four categories, as shown in Figure 0-2

Figure 0-2 All Stages Score Distribution, EN-02 The scoring is only applicable for off-site renewable energy sources if 100% use this While for on-site renewable energy sources, a drop in percentage can be seen, 10%, 5%, and 3% As both

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks renewable energy sources exist, a significant disparity shouldn’t be observed as almost a 90% drop Aside from this, the categorization of off-site renewable energy source usage should also be provided by BERDE

• BERDE aspires to be the leading platform for green building construction in the Philippines However, based on the structure and score distribution of EN-02, it somewhat invites robust construction of structures As there are minimal renewable energy sources in the Philippines, developers can build new buildings near these areas where these sources can be utilized This prevents further development in areas needing economic growth.

Water

• Based on the list of requirements, it is the developer’s decision how much reduction in water consumption will be done Although this provides the developer the leeway to decide for themselves, it also leads them to cross-check the GBRS’s requirements

• Two documents are required under WT-01, Water Base Case and Water Design Case However, when these two documents are expounded about their content, it entails almost similar data The two screen captures of these, as shown in the BERDE User Guide, can be found below

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

Figure 0-3 Requirements for Water Base Case (Left) and Water Design Case (Right), WT-01

Figure 0-3 shows the repetitive requirements that affect the manageability of attaining scores under this sub-category It might be possible for the PHILGBC to combine these two documents into one requirement

• In #4 of Requirements Stage 1, to show the expansion of other water efficiency and conservation strategies, instead of using the phrase “should include the following,” it will be helpful if an additional phrase of “but not limited to.” Adding the latter phrase conveys the council’s openness to innovation

• For Stage 2 Construction, BERDE requires hiring a third-party commissioning body This is different from the qualified professional hired to prepare the requirements This third party's responsibilities are to Conduct commissioning and testing for the water-related building systems in the project Similar to previous concerns, an additional workforce requires an additional budget for staffing

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• The term “graywater” is used for this sub-category For most publications, it is spelled as grey water, but it is only in the United States that it is spelled as gray water Since BERDE is not American-based, it is helpful to use the more popular and proper term “greywater” instead

• Similar to other sub-categories, this also encourages employing competent and qualified professionals This will require an additional financial budget from the developer Additional costs will also be for the water base case and water design case, which have almost the exact requirements Putting these two reports together into a single document will make this more cost-efficient

• The developer has the choice to reuse greywater on-site or off-site Whatever the developer’s choice, concurrent requirements must be passed to PHILGBC to ensure compliance However, besides the financial cost needed to employ the treatment, operation, and maintenance of these installations will require planning and manpower

• Greywater is “wastewater from non-toilet plumbing systems such as hand basins, washing machines, showers, and baths.” This wastewater is still far from being potable Therefore, proper treatment must be done before reuse There is no mention of the frequency of testing for the commissioning and testing of the graywater system This is despite consistency being one of the most important parameters of water treatment

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• There is no mention of the basis of water parameters The phrase used under this category is “Based on a testing methodology from a generally accepted standard for graywater system.” Since BERDE is the GBRS standard for the Philippines, specifically mentioning the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Administrative Order (DAO) No 2021-19 will be more helpful DAO No.2021-19, also known as the Updated Water Quality Guidelines (WQG) and General Effluent Standards (GES) for Selected Parameters, is the legal baseline for the water parameters within Philippine Standards This is published by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

• The scoring distribution uses the phrase:

Figure 0-4 Score Distribution (Graywater Reuse), WT-02

“provided supply of graywater to the project for at least five (5) years” The wording of this phrase is quite confusing Instead of “supply of graywater,” it must be changed to

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• As this only requires the reuse of greywater, it will be more applicable if the discussion includes the installation of Sewage and Septage (Wastewater) Treatment Plants (STP/WWTP) Apart from this being more sustainably sounding, this will also be compliant with local regulations related to installing STP and WWTP for large-scale projects

• There is a pending house bill in the 18 th Congress of the Philippines about installing Rain Harvesting Facilities in all institutional, commercial, industrial, and residential projects in the Philippines There are also some cities (e.g., Cebu, Mandaue) that already have regulations about the installation of rain harvesting facilities The requirements for this sub-category will also be more suitable if it mentions the developer’s compliance with the local standards about rainwater harvesting

• Although Rainwater harvesting structures are generally helpful, there are also downsides This will limit the developer in making open areas that receive water Purposefully refraining from the open space access to rain will prevent the growth of the landscape vegetation Therefore, the design of the rain harvesting system must be double-checked upon assessment to ensure that this is not negatively affecting the project area

• There is only one category for the score distribution If the developer designed and installed their rainwater system, it would guarantee them three points However, since this is a

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks measure of effectivity of green solutions, automatically getting three points doesn’t invite innovation from the developer’s side To categorize the score distribution system, LEED uses the calculation replicating the natural site hydrology processes and retains the runoff from the associated percentile of regional or local rainfall events The corresponding score is given depending on the percentage event volume retained (i.e., infiltrated, evapotranspiration, or collected and reused).

Waste

• Since these tackles, the entirety of waste management, a much more extensive explanation of the requirements and specifications of the recommended plans and programs is expected However, there is no provided quantitative value for this An example is given below

Figure 0-5 Requirements for the Waste Storage, WS-01

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• The requirements for apt waste storage are very vague, as listed in the three bullet points There are no specific parameters on how this waste storage must be The assessor of the application will only rely on the developer's recommendations Unlike other sections, WS-

01 doesn’t employ a third-party body Thus, there is no assurance that there might be an error in the sizing of the waste storage

• Consistency with the words and phrases used in the User Guide is essential This section uses the term “waste bins or storage on-site.” However, the latter part of WS-01 uses the term “waste storage” to pertain to the same thing The terms used must be consistent to prevent miscommunication between PHILGBC and the applicants

• The term “waste diversion” in the Score Distribution implies not waste reduction but the change in the waste endpoint Waste Diversion has a connotation that the waste will have a different endpoint, not in landfills Proper construction of this might be needed to ensure that there will be no confusion when the developers comply with WS-01

• In the BERDE User Guide, there are highlighted phrases These highlighted phrases are defined in the later section of the same category However, these phrases are not hyperlinked to their extended explanation Following the user guide will be much easier if the content connected is hyperlinked

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

An example is the underlined phrase on page 236: “Providing Waste Bins or Storage on-site.” But its hyperlinked section is the one shown in Figure 0-5 Providing the hyperlink between these two separate sections can ease the usage of the User Guide

• WS-01 provides a guide on how to use a waste base case based on an existing comparable project Although this makes sense for multiple projects, this is mostly not applicable to most projects This section also includes using a waste base case from a reference standard However, there are no mentions of what is accepted as a reference standard, unlike what is provided in the previous sub-categories These questions about referencing other documents must be done cautiously, as miscommunication in these cases might arise.

Materials

• The content of MT-01 and MT-02 is almost overlapping and can be combined into a single sub-category Although MT-01 prioritizes green procurement and MT-02 is local procurement, the combination of the two is possible and might be more suitable

• With the title of this sub-category, green procurement, the Purpose and Intent section implies that “green procurement” is equivalent to the materials with “less environmental impact.” There are no mentions of sustainable materials in the Purpose and Intent To remove this implication, the Purpose and Intent section must be expounded

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• The national and local government recommends many specifications and regulations for green raw materials Under the Requirements Section mentioned in Stage 1, the must-haves requirements are enumerated However, it is only limited to very few materials If possible, this list must be extended by PHILGBC Extending the list will give the developer more leeway in procuring “green” products

• The requirements mentioned in the design are all on the assumption that it will push through during the construction and operations stage of the project However, all of these requirements are only passed as Proof of Intent These proofs of intent are questionable if it’s enough to show the green quality of the building This recommendation applies to all scores that will be awarded at the design stage of the project

• In the Requirement Section of Stage 1, the term “percentage of specified materials” is written However, how this percentage will be computed is not mentioned clearly Instead of its current explanation, it can be written as: “Compute the percentage of the specified materials that meet the green requirements in the design cost-based.”

• In the Score Distribution, instead of using “sustainability requirements” to be consistent with the goal of MT-01, it recommended being replaced with “green requirements.”

• The first mention of the term “locally manufactured” in this section is in the Purpose and Intent Since this is already defined in another section, providing a hyperlink between this

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks phrase and its definition will be helpful One of BERDE's challenges is its fragmented design, so it is hard to browse the definition of locally manufactured

• The definition of being locally manufactured is 160 km by BERDE This parallels the 100 miles consideration under LEED Green Building Rating System In LEED, the locally manufactured materials are extracted, processed, and manufactured locally at 100 miles However, the restriction of BERDE is only those manufactured within this radius Further explanation of this categorization is needed for this sub-category to be more inclusive of the products that can be called locally manufactured

• The Philippines is an archipelago compared to the United States, where LEED was initially designed for utilization Therefore, utilizing the same radius hinders the developers from acquiring this credit score A 160-km radius is relatively small compared to the vast ocean and sea dividing the islands A review of suitable radium for local procurement is recommended

• The score distribution has three categories The categories require 10% of the total cost to be locally manufactured at different locations, 160 km, 130 km, and 100 km Considering the material production of neighboring municipalities and cities, the 30-kilometer disparity is not much of a difference regarding its effect on the environment

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• With the sub-category title, Local Procurement, the content is expected to be limited to

“procurement.” But there were no mentions of local procurement within this section but only “locally-manufactured.” To avoid confusion, a change in the title should be made

• Materials from community-based enterprises are often more costly than those from retail stores Also, it is a challenge for developers to procure materials in large quantities from smaller enterprises Shortage in material supply from a single store can also result in getting more suppliers, thus, more hassle for the planning team

• The term “sustainable materials” is repeatedly mentioned in this section However, as concluded from this study, there is no definitive explanation of sustainable materials Putting a list of the qualities of sustainable materials can help developers get the total cost of the sustainable materials

• The requirements are only presented as a tiny percentage of the total materials But, in the entirety of the section, there are no definitions of social enterprise and community groups Adding proper definitions will make this entire section more organized for the users of BERDE

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

Transportation

• The first section, Purpose and Intent, encourages the developers to identify the site close to establishments that provide basic needs Specifically, TR-01 mentioned that these key establishments must be within the 250-m radial distance from the project However, 250 meters is minimal, considering the urban setting in the Philippines Therefore, finding key establishments within this distance might be a bit more challenging

• This sub-category invites the formation of concentrated urban growth On the other hand, the concentration of development in a particular area ensures the local sustainability of an already growing city and municipality However, this limits the possibility of growth from smaller communities The pros and cons of considering this sub-category must be reviewed accordingly

• A list of key establishments is provided in TR-01 Instead of using the introduction: “Key

Establishments should include the following,” it is recommended to be rephrased as “Key Establishments should include the following but not limited to.”

• The Philippines’ transportation network is inefficient and ineffective in management and movement Therefore, it is recommended that there should be a review of whether this concept should be ideal to be considered, given that this factor is typically not solely

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks controlled by the project owner Additionally, most of the public transportation in the Philippines has no specified terminals or stops The lack of access to these should be considered before the design of this sub-category

• This sub-category invites the formation of concentrated urban growth, similar to the last sub-category

• As part of the requirements for Stage 1, the List of Mass Transportation Modes is needed The list requires mentioning the Schedule of Trips for mass transportation However, it must be mentioned that most mass transportations: jeepneys, busses, and trains, have no schedules

• As part of this study’s conclusion, there is a reliance on the government and private sectors This is an example of a difficult-to-attain requirement since it requires coordination with a privatized government office Obtaining these documents might be challenging for the developers and cause delays in the certification acquisition

Figure 0-6 Notes about the Requirements if the Mass Transportation is Railway, TR-02

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• This sub-category encourages the public to use alternative fuel and fuel-efficient vehicles Unlike America, where the usage of electric cars is prevalent, the sustainable vehicle market is not yet fully stabilized in the Philippines It might be too early for the PHILGBC to introduce this as an actual sub-category in BERDE

• The Philippine Government also prescribes Minimum Parking Requirements According to Presidential Decree 1096, otherwise known as the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the National Building Code of the Philippines, there are specifications for the design standards and the number of parking spaces dependent on the type of structure It is recommended to add this law in the references section of TR-03

• The phrase “Limit the number of parking spaces for vehicles to the minimum regulatory requirement of the project” implies that the minimum number of parking spaces is enough

It doesn’t encourage adding more parking spaces

• TR-03 utilizes the term “target percentage,” as seen in the Compliance Notes Section This encourages cross-checking behavior from the side of the developer

• The first bullet in the Purpose and Intent section of TR-04 states, “Establish transportation strategies to reduce the use of fossil fuels in private vehicles by promoting cycling.” This

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks dangling phrase can be rephrased better instead of incorporating “fossil fuels.” It can be rephrased simply as “Establish transportation strategies by promoting cycling.”

• There is no specified number of bicycle parking, showers, changing rooms, and lockers in TR-04 Instead, the word “appropriate” term is added to these words, but there are no specifications about the quantitative requirements

• Similar to other sub-categories, this also encourages employing competent and qualified professionals This will require an additional financial budget from the developer

• In the requirements section of TR-04, locker rooms are encouraged to be provided However, in the Score Distribution section, there are no mentions of locker rooms Adding locker rooms in the Score Distribution can bring consistency to the content of TR-04

• The road network in the Philippines is not accommodating to cycling Most areas have no bicycle lanes; if there are, it is not appropriately designed and is accident-prone Encouraging the public to use bicycles with these pending dangers might fire back instead

• The first section, Purpose and Intent, aims to promote pedestrian mobility In the second section, Requirements, it is recommended that the developers choose a site within 250-m walking distance of existing pedestrian amenities However, 250 meters is minimal, considering the urban setting in the Philippines Therefore, finding these amenities within this distance might be a bit more challenging

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• In the Requirement section of Stage 1: Design, it is recommended to use the phrase

“Pedestrian amenities may include but not limited to” instead of just using “Pedestrian Amenities may include.”

• The exact section mentions that the walkways should be designed “in accordance to generally-accepted standards for accessibility.” Instead of using this term, it is more helpful for the user to mention the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) requirements and the National Building Code concerning the design of transport utilities

• In another section of BERDE, proper lighting is required Cross-referencing TR-05 with these sub-categories (e.g., HW-01, LE-09) can help the users comply with the requirement under TR-05 of having good visibility and adequate lighting.

Health and Wellbeing

• In the Purpose and Intent Section of HW-01, the third bullet is shown in Figure 0-6 However, when this phrase is read, it is pretty hard for the readers to understand

Figure 0-7 Purpose and Intent, HW-01

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

Rephrasing this section might be more helpful to the user Instead of the current content, the suggested new phrase is “Evaluate the implementation of the lighting systems to confirm the lighting levels are within reasonable levels are achieved and to identify further opportunities for visual comfort.”

• Similar to other sub-categories, this also encourages employing competent and qualified professionals This will require an additional financial budget from the developer

• The usage of the term “regular” to show a time stamp not directly identifying the recommended frequency Using more specific adjectives is recommended

• In the Requirements Section for Stage 2, it must be highlighted that the exact requirements for Stage 1 should also be passed Clarity with the requirements will prevent confusion among BERDE users

• In the Score and Distribution section, in the one-point category, the only requirement is to provide all regularly occupied spaces with appropriate illumination levels and minimized glare But the usage of the term “appropriate” is ambiguous However, HW-01 has no specific reference regarding illumination and glare parameters

• This sub-category mainly focuses on the users' comfort, so the trade-off with economic costs and other social repercussions in producing these materials might be neglected

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• In the Purpose and Intent Section, the second bullet uses “users health.” For it to be grammatically correct, it should be changed to “users’ health.”

• Similar to other sub-categories, this also encourages employing competent and qualified professionals This will require an additional financial budget from the developer

• The usage of the term “regular” to show a time stamp not directly identifying the recommended frequency Using more specific adjectives is recommended

• Compared to the last sub-category, the requirements regarding illuminance for HW-02 is for it to be sufficient However, the usage of the term “sufficient” also shows ambiguity Referencing the quantitative values for sufficient illuminance using daylight will cause less confusion among users

• A list enumerating the typical regularly occupied spaces will help the BERDE users to identify what should be prioritized for visual comfort and daylight access

• In the Compliance Notes for Stages 1 and 2, BERDE requires the applicants to pass a report about the percentage of total floor area However, there are different values related to the total floor area It can be the total gross floor area, and it can also be the total net floor area To avoid confusion, it should be clarified what the total floor area is for

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• HW-03 highlights the importance of having quality outdoor views with the goal of it being able to provide positive benefits to users’ health, well-being, and productivity However, the list of natural features is limiting and quite ambiguous Extending this list can provide variation in choosing project sites

• Similar to other sub-categories, this also encourages employing competent and qualified professionals This will require an additional financial budget from the developer

• The usage of the term “regular” to show a time stamp not directly identifying the recommended frequency Using more specific adjectives is recommended

• Instead of “wellbeing,” the accepted spelling is “well-being.”

• Part of the requirements for Stage 1 is the calculated percentage of the regularly occupied spaces with access to outdoor views But the exact process of how to provide this calculation is missing in HW-03

• About the previous recommendation for HW-03, the calculation will use the areal data of those with access to outdoor views However, there is no specified distance on how far the regularly occupied spaces are from the outdoor views before it is considered regularly occupied space without access to outdoor views

9 In the Compliance Notes for Stages 1 and 2, BERDE requires the applicants to pass a report about the percentage of total floor area However, there are different values

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks related to the total floor area It can be the total gross floor area, and it can also be the total net floor area To avoid confusion, it should be clarified what the total floor area is for BERDE

10 In the Purpose and Intent Section, it is mentioned in the first bullet that the purpose of HW-04 is to ensure that the indoor thermal conditions are within acceptable thermal levels However, regarding the term “acceptable,” there are no references on what specifications the users should refer to ensure acceptable thermal levels

11 Similar to the previous observation, in the Requirements Section for Stage 1, the term used is “reasonable thermal levels and controls.” But using the term “reasonable” in a legal document is ambiguous and not providing legal standards Referencing a proper document containing the “reasonable thermal levels and controls” is recommended for the ease of the users

12 It is mentioned in the Requirements section that a document must be used as a reference, as shown in Figure 0-8 But this reference was already renewed in 2020 The 2020 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 incorporates eight published addenda to the 2017 edition [136]

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

Figure 0-8 Reference for Reasonable Thermal Levels, HW-04

• Similar to the other syntactic structure-related observations, the Score and Distribution for HW-04 provide categorization using qualitative adjectives to separate the scoring among the three categories It uses the terms “high” and “appropriate,” which show the ambiguity of what is required by BERDE

Figure 0-9 Stage 1 Score Distribution, HW-04

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• Similar to other sub-categories, this also encourages employing competent and qualified professionals This will require an additional financial budget from the developer

• This sub-category mainly focuses on the users' comfort, so the trade-off with economic costs and other social repercussions in producing these materials might be neglected

• In the Requirements Section, the usage of the terms “generally accepted” (Stage 1) and

“appropriate” (Stage 2) is observed However, these terms it implies qualitative implications and not quantitative, which should be prioritized for acoustic level calculation Actual references for the generally accepted and appropriate standards must be mentioned within the content for HW-05

• Similar to previous observations, the values of acoustic comfort used are also qualitative, as shown in Figure 0-10

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

Emissions

• GHG was first introduced in the Purpose and Intent Section of EM-01 In research, an acronym's first introduction should be explained with its full definition In the first bullet,

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

GHG is already used and not fully worded The full name for GHG was only clarified on the third bullet, as shown in Figure 0-15

Figure 0-15 Purpose and Intent, EM-01 Instead of explaining the third bullet, GHG should be defined in the first bulleted phrase

• “Improving the project's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions” is written on the third bullet point for Purpose and Intent Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions release harmful GHG on the environment Therefore, “improving” is incorrect as it implies adding more to GHG emissions

• Based on the Purpose and Intent Section, EM-01 aims to contribute to the education and local research on GHGs However, there are no requirements for all stages directly correlated with the project’s contribution to education and local research To fulfill this,

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks community involvement in the plans and programs of the project’s GHG emissions control can be done

• EM-01 only enumerates seven GHGs, which are the primary GHGs However, the Philippine Clean Air Act enumerates more GHGs other than the enumerated ones Instead of just providing a list based on US EPA, local laws and regulations might be more helpful in developing BERDE The Philippine Clean Air Act also specializes in stationary sources suitable for BERDE that targets construction projects

• Unlike other sub-categories, EM-01 has only two categories for scoring, three points and two points The difference between the two categories is only the submission of a report on the recommendations to reduce GHG emissions for both stages This seems redundant as the compliance requirements are already providing these data

• The third bullet point under the Purpose and Intent Section can be simplified further in terms of syntactic structure The current phrase is “Monitor the refrigerant use and management in the project to further lessen the contribution to the depletion of the ozone layer.” It is recommended to reword it as “Monitor the refrigerant use and management in the project to lessen its contribution to ozone layer depletion.”

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• In the Requirement section, there was no mention of Global Warming Potential (GWP) However, for the score distribution, GWP is part of the requirements For the consistency of the entire document, both should be included and explained in the Requirement section

• For the requirements for Stages 1 and 2, there are explanations about the absence of refrigerants in the project The difference in explanation between the two stages is shown below

Figure 0-16 Non-Refrigerants using Projects Stage 1 (Top) and Stage 2 (Bottom), EM-02

For Stage 1, it is clarified that the absence must be shown in the Design of the Project However, for Stage 2, it is not clarified that the absence must be done during the project's construction phase Rewording of the part in Stage 2 must be changed to “If the project will not use refrigerants, the project team must confirm the absence of the refrigerants in the project's construction phase.”

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• The compliance notes for EM-02 mentioned the project's commissioning plan for the HVAC and Refrigeration system Similarly, commissioning requires an additional financial budget.

Community Engagement

• The goal of Community Engagement as a core framework is to address socioeconomic needs and improve community resilience However, as there are only two sub-categories under this core framework, community facility and Filipino art, fulfilling this goal is difficult to foresee

• The culture in the Philippines is very much rooted in social support Therefore, adding community engagement is very suitable in the Philippine Context

• CE-01 continuously used the terms “beneficiary community” and “partner community organizations.” However, there are no exact definitions within CE-01 Adding the BERDE’s definitions of these terms will help the developers to find the exact type of communities the PHILGBC envisions to be supported by the developers

• The acronym “TGFA” was used in the Requirements Section for Stage 1 Although engineers and architects know this is equivalent to the Total Gross Floor Area, not defining

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks it in the document is not good As this is not a commonly used term, TGFA should be defined clearly on its first usage in the document, which is in CE-01

• The phrase “0.5% or more of the TGFA of the project but must be at least 50 m floor area” is used in the Requirement Section of Stage 1 Instead of using this phrase, it will be more apparent to the users of the User Guide if it is rephrased to “must be more than or equal to

0.5% or more of the TGFA of the project or at least 50 m 2 floor area, whichever is minimum”

• There are no specifications in CE-01 that mention the community facility's desired design and qualities BERDE should provide the specifications for the community facility, as this will help the developers design the community facility in their project

• There is dangling conjunction – and, in the second bulleted point in the Purpose and Intent Section of CE-02 This must be removed

• The word “procure” is used in the requirements section of Stage 1 However, the bullet points under the first requirement: “Procure artworks crafted by local Filipino artist,” mentions that it should be permanently installed Note that this is written under the Design Stage, meaning all of this will only be plans and recommendations Therefore, instead of using the phrase “The artwork must be:” it should be rephrased to “The artwork must have plans for the artwork to be:”

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• Although Stage 3 is not part of this study, it is essential to bring up this notice

Figure 0-17 Requirement of On-loan artworks for Stage 2 (Top) and Stage 3 (Bottom), CE-02

It is not entirely clear why there should be a difference in the years for these two stages The length of years must be reviewed and checked if the difference matters.

Economic Opportunity

• There is no exact definition of what is considered green jobs in EO-01 As this section's purpose and intent are to create green employment opportunities, it should be clarified what these opportunities will be

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks

• LEED is still not offering this criterion with its latest version of GBRS However, BERDE already includes it As green building and sustainability are not yet fully internalized in the local construction industry, a double take about its inclusion must be done

• This sub-category also requires hiring a qualified professional who is competent in the field Hiring a new professional will require an additional financial budget for the developer Also, with green employment opportunities becoming a trend, employing individuals knowledgeable in this field will require a higher salary than regular job opportunities

• There is dangling conjunction – and, in the second bulleted point in the Purpose and Intent Section of EO-02 This must be removed

• This sub-category also requires hiring a qualified professional who is competent in the field Hiring a new professional will require an additional financial budget for the developer

• Under the Requirements Section of the EO-01, it is mentioned that the local labor program must include labor support from “the resident of the city or municipality where the city is located.” Given the geographical area of many cities and municipalities in the Philippines where green construction is concentrated, there will be a limited labor force—considering what local employment might be more effective if neighboring cities and municipalities

Core Frameworks and Sub-core Frameworks can also be considered This kind of sub-category can also invite migration, mainly daylight migration Migration, although sometimes helpful, immediate implementation can disturb the local situation

• As there are no definite boundaries about sustainability in terms of employment, the inclusion of Local Employment as a factor for sustainability and the green quality of a building must be reviewed Although it is acknowledged that this provides socio-economic comfort to the community, its impact (both negative and positive) should be analyzed accordingly

• Similar to EO-02, the inclusion of women empowerment as a factor for sustainability and the green quality of a building must be reviewed as there is no direct correlation Aside from the socioeconomic responsibility to gender empowerment, it might be more inclusive if this is focused on Gender Empowerment

• There is an existing Law in the Philippines, Republic Act No 9710 This law is also known as the Magna Carta of Women This law recognizes the economic, political, and sociocultural realities that affect women’s current condition The State affirms the role of women in nation-building and ensures the substantive equality of women and men In response to this law, there should be mentions of this law in the context of E0-03

I am a Master's Student from Vietnam National University - the Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (VNU-HCMUT) who is currently conducting an extensive study about the Building for Ecologically Responsive Design Excellence (BERDE) The main objective of this project is to assess BERDE as a GBRS based on your feedback as the primary users and stakeholders

A four-part questionnaire is shown in the following sections Please read all of the statements carefully and answer all of them If you have difficulty answering the questionnaire, please do not hesitate to contact me The results of this survey will be used SOLELY for research purposes

Thank you for participating in this questionnaire

-This section is optional - Name

From this part onwards, each section is required to be ACCOMPLISHED

For the demographics survey, kindly check the box that applies to you and your experience

GBRS Professionals  More than ten years 

Involvement in Sustainable Building Field of Specialty

Highly Involved  Construction and Post-Evaluation 

Part II: Please choose one out of five options (from 1 = "Strongly Disagree" to 5 "Strongly Agree") to decide whether you agree with the following statements about BERDE Put a check on the box provided for each statement Refer to the sample answered survey below as a guide on how to answer this questionnaire

Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

1 The explanation of the purpose and intent is very detailed     

1 The explanation of the purpose and intent is very detailed     

2 The adaptation of eleven core frameworks is valid     

3 The eleven categories are important parameters for green construction and sustainability     

The compliance requirements for credit distribution support the purpose and intent of all BERDE's core frameworks.

5 The compliance requirements can be attained at a considerable cost     

The compliance requirements ensure that the project also follows national and local policies, laws, and regulations.

The compliance requirements are adequate to provide a good assessment and feedback regarding the building's green building initiatives.

8 The compliance requirements are manageable for the project team to obtain     

9 The compliance requirements are updated and are still effective during the conduct of this study     

10 Simultaneous acquisition of the compliance requirements is manageable     

The compliance requirements for BERDE can be complied with by all local contractors (small, medium, and big).

12 The documents linked in the BERDE User Guide (V

4.2.0) are useful in assuring compliance     

13 The details, content, and requirements are explained well in the BERDE User Guide V 4.2.0     

Following the BERDE User Guide, V 4.2.0 can ensure the compliance of the building under the eleven core frameworks.

15 Continuity can be observed between Stage 1 and Stage 2 as shown in BERDE User Guide V.4.2.0     

16 Stages 1 and 2 are designed to adapt well to the local green building industry     

17 Stages 1 and 2 are updated with the current green building and sustainability trends     

18 The Credit Distribution, the credit score, and corresponding requirements are justified     

19 The compliance requirements and their corresponding credit score are correlatively matched     

20 Getting credit scores for BERDE is manageable     

The minimum requirements, requirements, and compliance notes are relevant documents needed to prove the building's compliance with sustainability.

22 The credit score for each core framework is justified and well-distributed     

23 The economic costs needed for the compliance requirements are justified     

The presentation of modals and auxiliary models is well- defined and does not cause any inconsistency or vagueness.

25 BERDE provides positive brand recognition     

26 The core framework used by BERDE covers all important green building and sustainability concepts     

27 BERDE User Guide V 4.2.0 provides an adequate explanation for the award acquisition     

28 Payment and fees for the processing and assessment are justified     

29 BERDE Program supports the development programs of the National Government     

BERDE Program works hand-in-hand with Policy

Development and Programs toward sustainability in the

31 BERDE applies and encourages the current best practices in the green building industry     

32 BERDE User Guide V 4.2.0 makes it possible to perform a good assessment of the building     

33 The Star, Scores, and Assessment is a good scale for

34 BERDE is a reliable GBRS for the Philippines     

35 BERDE Award Certification builds trust and confidence among project stakeholders     

36 BERDE Certification Award is a marketing tool     

BERDE project allows you to showcase your leadership in sustainability through unbiased, balanced, and impartial assessment and certification of your building performance.

Part III: Please choose one out of five options (from 1 = "Strongly Disagree" to 5 "Strongly Agree") to decide whether these concepts were included, discussed, highlighted, and elaborated under BERDE User Guide Version 4.2.0 Use the Likert Scale as a guide for an agreement if each concept of sustainability is highly encouraged in the latest format of BERDE GBRS (Version 4.2.0) (e.g., Proper Gas Emissions are highly encouraged by the BERDE GBRS.)*

Put a check for each empty box Refer to the sample answered survey below as a guide on how to answer this questionnaire

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

N Concepts of Sustainability* Likert Scale

N Concepts of Sustainability* Likert Scale

8 Human Comfort / Occupant's Behavior and Feedback     

9 Health, Well-being, and Safety     

11 History and Heritage Conservation and

14 Economic Contribution of the Project     

25 Pre-construction Condition of the

LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE OF EACH CONCEPT OF SUSTAINABILITY

Part IV: Please choose one out of five options (from 1 = "Not at all Important" to 5 "Very Important") to identify the Level of Importance you consider these basic concepts of sustainability are, as one of the key users and stakeholders of BERDE GBRS Put a check for each empty box Refer to the sample answered survey below as a guide on how to answer this questionnaire

Number Category Level of Importance

8 Human Comfort / Occupant's Behavior and Feedback     

9 Health, Well-being, and Safety     

11 History and Heritage Conservation and

14 Economic Contribution of the Project     

25 Pre-construction Condition of the