Building Sustainable Score (BSS)—A Hybrid Process Approach for Sustainable Building Assessment in China


Sustainable building in China has gained attention both domestically and abroad. Despite the fast increase in sustainable assessment tools developed locally or adopted from overseas, there are still criticisms about the current situation of weak implementation and lack of comprehensive consideration. The lack of consideration of economic and social aspects or building performance on whole building life cycle all lead to departure from the true meaning of sustainable development. And lack of participation on the part of stakeholders makes it too theoretical to be carried out. This research aims to develop a model to address this problem. This research started with review of current sustainable assessment tools applied in China. As the assessment indicators have clear regional disparities, and almost no current tool considers all three pillars of environmental, economic and social in building life cycle. An industry survey was therefore designed for generation of indicators at different building stages, and personal interviews relevant to different occupation in building industry were conducted to complement the questionnaire survey. After that, the model Building Sustainable Score (BSS) was developed based on the stakeholders’ participation. Finally, the model is verified by a case study.

Share and Cite:

Liu, J. , Ding, G. and Samali, B. (2013) Building Sustainable Score (BSS)—A Hybrid Process Approach for Sustainable Building Assessment in China. Journal of Power and Energy Engineering, 1, 58-62. doi: 10.4236/jpee.2013.15009.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] S. Junnila, A. Horvath and A. A. Goggemos, “Life-Cycle Assessment of Office Buildings in Europe and the United States,” Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2006, pp. 10-17.
[2] Netherland Consulate in China, “ChinaTop Sector Energy: Sustainable Building Opportunities for Dutch companies,” 2012.
[3] Green Olympic Building Research Center, “Green Olympic Building Assessment System,” China Construction Industrial Press, Beijing, 2003.
[4] L. Y. Shen, M. Wu and J. Y. Wang, “A Model for Assessing the Feasibility of Construction Project in Contribution to the Attainment of Sustainable Development,” Journal of Construction Research, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2002, pp. 255-269.
[5] E. Kaatz, D. Root, P. A. Bowen, and R. C. Hill, “Advancing Key Outcomes of Sustainability Building Assessment,” Building Research and Information, Vol. 34, No. 4, 2006, pp. 308-320.
[6] M. M. Bilec, R. J. Ries and H. S. Matthews, “Life-Cycle Assessment Modeling of Construction Processes for Buildings,” Infrastructure System, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2010, pp. 199-205.
[7] C. Scheuer, G. A. Keoleian and P. Reppe, “Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Performance of a New University Building: Modeling Challenges and Design Implications,” Energy and Buildings, Vol. 35, No. 10, 2003, pp. 1049-1064.
[8] A. Guggemos and A. Horvath, “Strategies of Extended Producer Responsibility for Buildings,” Infrastructure System, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2003, pp. 65-74.
[9] R. J. Cole, “Emerging Trend in Building Environmental Assessment Methods,” Build Research and Information, Vol. 26, 1998, pp. 3-16.
[10] P. O. Akadiri, P. O. Olomolaiye and E. A. Chinyio, “Multi-Criteria Evaluation Model for the Selection of Sustainable Materials for Building Projects,” Automation in Construction, Vol. 30, 2013, pp. 113-125.
[11] Y. Yang, B. Li and R. Yao, “A Method of Identifying and Weighting Indicators of Energy Efficiency Assessment in Chinese Residential Buildings,” Energy Policy, Vol. 38, No. 12, 2010, pp. 7687-7697.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.