Smart and Sustainable Built Environment - Emerald

Smart an

d Su

stainab

le B

uilt E

nviro

nm

en

tV

olu

me

7 Nu

mb

er 3

/4 2

018

em

erald

pu

blish

ing

.co

m

www.emeraldinsight.com/loi/sasbe

Volume 7 Number 3/4 2018ISSN 2046-6099

Volume 7 Number 3/4 2018

Smart and Sustainable Built Environment


Number 3/4

225 Editorial advisory board

226 Operating energy demand of various residential building typologies in different European climatesBrian Cody, Wolfgang Loeschnig and Alexander Eberl

251 Criteria and barriers for the application of green building features in Hong KongJayantha Wadu Mesthrige and Ho Yuk Kwong

277 Tax increment financing in the UK and USA: its prospects for urban regeneration in NigeriaAlirat Olayinka Agboola, Timothy Oluwafemi Ayodele and Aderemi Olofa

293 Determination of urban sprawl’s indicators toward sustainable urban developmentMohammad Paydar and Enayatollah Rahimi

Quarto trim size: 174mm x 240mm

EDITOR-IN-CHIEFProfessor Rob RoggemaUniversity of Technology Sydney, AustraliaE-mail [email protected]

EDITORProfessor Andy van den DobbelsteenDelft University of Technology, The NetherlandsE-mail [email protected]

REGIONAL EDITOR – EAST ASIADr Joseph LaiHong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong

THEME EDITORSDr Vanita AhujaAmity University, IndiaDr Nimish BiloriaUniversity of Technology, AustraliaDr Dirk ConradieCSIR, South AfricaMichael Davis M.Pontificia Universidad Católica of Ecuador, EcuadorDr Erwin Heurkens W.T.M.Delft University of Technology, The NetherlandsProfessor Doris KowaltowskiUniversity of Campinas, BrazilDr Wafaa NadimThe German University in Cairo, Egypt

ISSN 2046-6099© 2018 Emerald Publishing Limited

Emerald Publishing LimitedHoward House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, United KingdomTel +44 (0) 1274 777700; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201E-mail [email protected] more information about Emerald’s regional offices please go to http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/officesCustomer helpdesk :Tel +44 (0) 1274 785278; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201E-mail [email protected], subscription and missing claims enquiries:E-mail [email protected] +44 (0) 1274 777700; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201

Missing issue claims will be fulfilled if claimed within six months of date of despatch. Maximum of one claim per issue.

Hard copy print backsets, back volumes and back issues of volumes prior to the current and previous year can be ordered from Periodical Service Company. Tel +1 518 537 4700; E-mail [email protected] For further information go to www.periodicals.com/emerald.html

Reprints and permissions serviceFor reprint and permission options please see the abstract page of the specific article in question on the Emerald web site (www.emeraldinsight.com), and then click on the “Reprints and permissions” link. Or contact:E-mail [email protected] Publisher and Editors cannot be held responsible for errors or any consequences arising from the use of information contained in this journal; the views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Publisher and Editors, neither does the publication of advertisements constitute any endorsement by the Publisher and Editors of the products advertised.

No part of this journal may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the articles are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the articles’ suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use.

Emerald is a trading name of Emerald Publishing LimitedPrinted by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY

Certificate Number 1985ISO 14001

ISOQAR certified Management System,awarded to Emerald for adherence to Environmental standard ISO 14001:2004.

Smart and Sustainable Built Environmentis indexed, abstracted and ranked in:British LibraryCabell's Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Computer

Science – Business Information Systems, Economics & Finance and Management

Construction Management AbstractsEBSCOICONDA®CIBlibraryINSPECNorwegian Social Science Data Services (NDS)ScopusSummon

Smart and Sustainable Built Environment has been awarded the distinction of CIB Encouraged Journal by the International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB)

Guidelines for authors can be found at:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/sasbe.htm


EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

Professor Hojjat AdeliOhio State University, USA

Dr Wim BakensCIB, The Netherlands

Professor Janis BirkelandUniversity of Melbourne, Australia

Professor Peter BrandonUniversity of Salford, UK

Professor David G. CarmichaelThe University of New South Wales, Australia

Dr Chrisna du PlessisUniversity of Pretoria, South Africa

Professor Dongping FangTsinghua University, People’s Republic of China

Dr Greg FolienteCSIRO, Australia

Dr Jeremy GibberdCSIR, South Africa

Dr Vanessa GomesUniversity of Campinas, Brazil

Professor Keith HampsonSustainable Built Environment National ResearchCentre, Australia

Professor Charles KibertUniversity of Florida, USA

Professor Stephen LeeCarnegie Mellon University, USA

Professor Qi Ming LiSoutheast University, People’s Republic of China

Dr Patrizia LombardiUniversity of Torino, Italy

Professor Ivo MartinacRoyal Institute of Technology (KTH), Sweden

Professor George OforiNational University of Singapore, Singapore

Dr David RileyPenn State University, USA

Professor Frank SchultmannKarlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany

Professor Geoffrey ShenThe Hong Kong Polytechnic University,Hong Kong

Professor Miroslaw SkibniewskiUniversity of Maryland, USA

Professor Eli StøaNorwegian University of Science and Technology,Norway

Professor Andy van den DobbelsteenDelft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Professor Tom WoolleyRachel Bevan Architects, UK

Dr Nori YokooUtsunomiya University, Japan

Smart and Sustainable BuiltEnvironment

Vol. 7 No. 3/4, 2018p. 225

r Emerald Publishing Limited2046-6099

225

Editorialadvisory

board


Operating energy demandof various residential building

typologies in differentEuropean climates

Brian Cody, Wolfgang Loeschnig and Alexander EberlInstitute of Buildings and Energy, Technische Universitat Graz, Graz, Austria

AbstractPurpose – The work described below compares three very different residential typologies in terms of theirenergy performance in operation. The purpose of this paper is to identify the influence of building typologiesand corresponding urban morphologies on operational energy demand and the potential for buildingintegrated energy production.Design/methodology/approach – Two of the typologies studied are apartment buildings while the thirdcomprises single-family homes located on small plots. An important factor under consideration is theinsertion into the respective urban design configuration so that mutual shading of the buildings and theensuing impact on energy performance is evaluated. Heating and cooling demands, as well as the potential forbuilding-integrated electricity production were investigated for four different European climates in a dynamicthermal simulation environment.Findings – The results show that the investigated apartment buildings have a lower operational energydemand than the single-family home in all climates. This advantage is most pronounced in cool climateconditions. At the same time the investigated single-family home has the highest potential for buildingintegrated renewable energy production in all climates. This advantage is most pronounced in low latitudes.Originality/value – The study builds up on generic buildings that are based on a common urban grid andare easily comparable and scalable into whole city districts. Still, these buildings are planned into such detail,that they provide fully functional floor plans and comply with national building regulations. This approachallows us to draw conclusions on the scale of individual buildings and at an urban scale at the same time.Keywords Renewable energy, Building simulation, Building typologies, Operational energy,Residential buildings, Urban fabricPaper type Research paper

IntroductionThe work presented here is part of a larger research project (Cody and Loeschnig 2011;Loeschnig 2012), which aims to gain a deeper understanding of the role of urban density inthe energy efficiency and sustainability of cities. The central aim of the project is to studythe relationship between urban density and energy performance of a city or urban area anddetermine, if possible, the optimal degree of urban density in a certain context. It isproposed, that there is an optimal degree of urban density in terms of the overall energydemand of a city or urban area, when the total energy demand for buildings andtransportation is considered and the potential for building integrated renewable energyproduction is also taken into account.

Smart and Sustainable BuiltEnvironmentVol. 7 No. 3/4, 2018pp. 226-250Emerald Publishing Limited2046-6099DOI 10.1108/SASBE-08-2017-0035

Received 11 August 2017Revised 13 November 201720 April 2018Accepted 2 May 2018

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:www.emeraldinsight.com/2046-6099.htm

© Brian Cody, Wolfgang Loeschnig and Alexander Eberl. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited.This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone mayreproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article ( for both commercial andnon-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The fullterms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

The authors approve that this research did not receive any funding and was not driven by anyfinancial or business interests. The research was conducted within the framework of basic research atthe Institute of Buildings and Energy without the involvement of external partners. There is nopotential conflict of interest.

226

SASBE7,3/4


It is to be expected, that the specific energy demand per person due to transportationreduces with increasing urban density, as the land area required for a given populationdecreases and therefore the expected overall travel distance should also become less withincreasing density. Higher densities also make public transportation systems more viable.

Earlier studies provide some evidence for this relationship between higher urban densityand reduced specific energy demand for transportation (Brownstone and Golob, 2009;Ewing and Cervero, 2010; Nichols and Kockelman, 2014). Increasing urban density can alsolead to reduced building energy demand, if apartment buildings instead of single-familydwellings are employed (Newton et al., 2000; Norman et al., 2006; Stejskal et al., 2011).

Previous research at the Institute of Buildings and Energy suggested, that city modelswith low energy consumption use more land than other models, which have higher energydemand, when the entire energy demand is met by renewable energy sources and the landrequired to achieve this is included in the land area for the city (see Figure 1, Loeschnig,2012, p. 149). Therefore ultimately a decision will have to be made between city models withthe lowest energy use and city models with the lowest land use.

Notwithstanding the obvious advantages of mixed use urban areas, based on the fact that60–70 per cent of all building floor space in a country like Austria is dedicated to housing(Statistics Austria, 2009) and therefore large areas in our cities remain predominantlymonofunctional residential areas, this part of the research project thus comprised theevaluation of the energy performance of various residential building typologies.

Literature reviewStudies on urban fabric and energy demandCompagnon (2004) investigated solar and daylight availability in the urban fabric and foundthat solar and daylight availability on facades can be significantly improved by changes inthe layout and orientation of buildings at a constant building density (pp. 325-327).

Steemers (2003) suggested that relatively high residential densities can be achieved in theUK without a significant impact on space heating requirements if average obstructionangles stay below about 30°. This would allow a theoretical FAR of up to 2.5 without

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

FAR

8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

km2

Urban Area

Energy Land

Total

Optimal Land Use/Optimal Energy DemandPopulation: 1,000,000

Low

est E

nerg

y D

eman

d

Low

est L

and

Use

Source: Loeschnig 2012, p. 149

Figure 1.Optimal energy use

versus optimalland use

227

Residentialbuilding

typologies

negative impact on operational energy demand (p. 6). However the study focussed on officebuildings and did not provide a detailed exploration of residential buildings.

Norman et al. (2006) compared the energy use for high and low residential density andfound that the choice of functional unit is relevant to a full understanding of urban densityeffects. Their results show that the energy demand for building operation in a low-densitysuburban development is more energy intensive than high-density urban core developmentby a factor of 2.0–2.5 on a per capita basis. However, when the functional unit is changed to aper unit of living space basis the factor decreases to a value between 1.0 and 1.5 (pp. 18-19).

Studies on building form and energy demandTereci et al. (2013) studied the impact of building typology on building energy demand andshowed that there is a strong correlation between building form and operational energydemand. The heating demand of a single-family home was shown to be approx. 25 per centhigher than that of a high-rise block with the same insulation standard (pp. 97-99).

Puurunen and Organschi (2013) compared a suburban single-family home with anapartment of similar size and concluded that, considered over a lifespan of 50 years, aconcrete-built apartment in a mid-rise multi-family house has a lower primary energydemand[1] than a timber framed single-family home of the same thermal standard(pp. 191-193). However, data for operational energy use were derived from statisticsand norms and was not adjusted to the constructions investigated in the life cycleanalysis (p. 190).

Studies on building location and energy demandAccording to the final report of the Global Energy Assessment (GEA) in 2012 the finalenergy demand[2] for heating and cooling is 155 kWh/m²a for average existing multi-family homes and 160 kWh/m²a for average existing single-family homes in warmmoderate climate regions of Western Europe. For cold moderate climate regions inWestern Europe the respective energy demand sums up to 225 kWh/m²a for multi-familyhomes and 261 kWh/m²a for single-family homes. For new buildings a standard of 50kWh/m² and year has been assumed for all climates and building types (see Uerge-Vorsatzet al., 2012, pp. 706-708). Though not further specified by the authors, it is assumed thatthese values refer to the total floor area (TFA), as this is the most common reference valuein statistics related to buildings.

A survey published by the Buildings Performance Institute Europe (BPIE) examined theenergy performance of the building stock of the European Union, Switzerland and Norway.For the purpose of this survey the countries were grouped into three larger regions: Northand West, Central and East ( former countries of the Eastern bloc) and South. According tosurvey data, the final space heating energy demand for recently constructed single-familyhouses ranges between 53 kWh/m²UFAa (Germany) and 124 kWh/m²UFAa (Sweden) inNorthern and Western Europe, between 68 kWh/m²UFAa (Portugal) and 95 kWh/m²UFAa(Italy) in Southern Europe, and between 34 kWh/m²UFAa (Slovenia) and 101 kWh/m²UFAa(Bulgaria) in Central and Eastern Europe (see BPIE, 2011, pp. 46-47). It should be noted thatonly the building stock of a few member states has been assessed and that the consideredperiods of construction were different for each country. Further energy demand, such ascooling and household electricity, was not assessed for residential buildings.

A database on the energy demand of European building stock can be found in theTABULA WebTool[3], which gives an overview of European residential buildings, sortedby typology and construction year. The primary energy demand for heating for recent(newer than 2001) Austrian residential buildings listed in this study ranges between 74 and104 kWh/m²UFAa. For Greece these values range between 56 and 160 kWh/m²UFAa and forIreland between 40 and 105 kWh/m²UFAa (see also: Loga et al., 2016).

228

SASBE7,3/4

Another online database on European building stock can be found at ENTRANZE[4].This database summarises building related statistical data from several sources in aninteractive map. According to this database the final energy consumption per m² residentialarea varies between 69 kWh/m²UFAa (Malta) and 381 kWh/m²UFAa (Luxembourg).The countries mentioned in the present paper show the following energy consumption:Austria: 231 kWh/m²UFAa, Ireland: 197 kWh/m²UFAa, Finland: 304 kWh/m²UFAa, Greece:202 kWh/m²UFAa. These numbers are average values for all residential buildings in thesecountries and do not reflect today’s standards.

MethodologyIn this study the thermal energy demand[5] for space conditioning was determined bydynamic thermal simulations, all carried out with the IES Virtual Environment (IESVE)suite. IESVE is an energy analysis and performance modelling software used for dynamicthermal and energy simulations of buildings. It has been extensively validated and assessedagainst a number of global as well as regional standards[6]. The simulation results representthe specific heating and cooling energy demand or thermal energy demand in kilowatt hoursper m² usable floor area (UFA) and year (kWh/m²UFAa).

The current definition of urban density on an architectural scale employs theratio of the TFA to the building site area (SA) – the so-called floor area ratio (FAR). In theresearch work described here, the ratio of UFA to building SA is employed instead, as it isthe UFA and not the TFA, which determines the number of people which can beaccommodated in a given urban area. For the purposes of this study, the usable areaper person is assumed to be the same for all typologies. This allows an unbiasedcomparison of the energy performance independent of differences in the specific floorarea per person for the various typologies and the different locations ( for data onaverage household sizes depending on typology and location see BPIE, 2011, pp. 27-31).The value assumed in this study is 45 m2 per person, corresponding to the average netdwelling area per person in Austria (Statistics Austria, 2017b). Based on this assumption,a comparison of energy demand based on floor area and a comparison based on a percapita basis yield the same result.

Despite the well-known discrepancy between predicted building energy performancebased on simulation results and actual measured energy performance, which is largelyaccounted to unpredicted occupant behaviour (Cali et al., 2016; Karjalainen, 2016; Nguyenand Aiello, 2013; Martinaitis et al., 2015; Schakib-Ekbatan et al., 2015), simulation waschosen for these investigations, as it allows to investigate the behaviour of different buildingtypes relative to one another under the same boundary conditions which then again allowsto study the effect of building typology on energy performance in isolation from otherparameters. The results are to be used to evaluate the relative performance of the differenttypologies and not to predict the absolute energy demand in operation.

The study builds upon generic buildings. Still, these buildings were planned in suchdetail, that they provide fully functional floor plans and comply with national buildingregulations. This approach allows us to draw conclusions on the scale of individualbuildings and at an urban scale at the same time.

To evaluate the operational energy demand, the thermal models of the investigatedbuilding typologies were placed in an urban pattern of uniform buildings (see Figures 2and 3). For better comparability and scalability all investigated typologies were designedto fit into a rectangular urban grid of 125× 125 m. For the same reasons all typologiesemploy the same building constructions (see chapter “Construction materials data”).The ventilation concept and thus the fan energy is assumed to be the same for alltypologies. The influence of the typology on lighting energy demand is assumed to besmall and is therefore not considered in this study.

229

Residentialbuilding

typologies

Model assumptionsFor the calculation of the total household energy demand or final energy demand it isassumed that heating and cooling is carried out by an electrical heat pump system withgeothermal source/sink and that the geothermal potential in all typologies is sufficient tocover heating energy demand (vertical boreholes). An average annual coefficient ofperformance of 3 is assumed. The final electrical energy demand for heating and cooling isthus assumed to be the total thermal energy demand divided by 3 (see Table XIX).

A final electrical energy demand of 45 kWh/m²UFAa for lighting, ventilation, householdappliances and domestic hot water services (DHWS) is assumed. This assumption is close tothe average annual electricity demand of Austrian households (Statistics Austria, 2017a).

This approach allows us to convert the total final energy demand into electrical energy,which is assumed to be the main form of renewable energy in future energy grids, and thuseasily compare the total energy demand to the potential for on-site renewable energy production.

Investigated building typologiesBoth the perimeter block development with a building depth of 15m and the high-rise buildingswith a façade to core distance of 9.5–11.5 m were designed as usage-neutral structures,which allow other uses besides residential use such as for office space. Both typologies have afloor-to-floor height of 3.5 m. The chosen design allows a wide variety of different apartmentsizes. The living areas are oriented towards all directions. The detached house typologies on theother hand have a floor-to-floor height of 3 m, as these serve primarily for residential use. Eachresidential unit has one dedicated car-parking space and one dedicated storeroom. All threetypes have a private outdoor space in the form of a private garden or balconies.

Typology A. In any attempt to achieve high urban density, the high-rise typology isobviously a likely candidate. The configuration considered here comprises 26-story

NNN

Notes: Left: typology A – high-rise residential towers. Centre: typology B – perimeter blockdevelopment. Right: typology C – single-family homes. Raster distance: 125 m

Figure 2.Urban patternof the investigatedtypologies

Figure 3.Simulation models oftypology A, B and C

230

SASBE7,3/4

high-rise residential towers (see Figures 4-7 and Table I), which are arranged to allow a45° daylight access angle (see Figures 6 and 7). The grid is skewed to improve solar access(see Figure 2, left). The building facades face north-east (NE), south-east (SE), south-west(SW) and north-west (NW), so that all apartments receive sunlight at some time of the day.The rectangular floor plan of the towers measures 35 m× 35 m. The central core measures16 m× 12 m. The towers are organised with apartments on all four sides of a square floorplan and accessed by internal circulation corridors (see Figure 5). Due to the height of thebuilding, two escape staircases and one firefighters lift are provided (according toAustrian Institute of Construction Engineering (OIB), 2015, pp. 7-8). There are 2 m deepbalconies on all sides of the buildings, which provide direct access to an outdoor space forthe occupants (see Figures 4 and 5).

Typology B. The second typology chosen represents a typical European city model,employing a medium rise perimeter block development with courtyards (cf. Oikonomou,2014, p. 490). The buildings are organised in seven-storey blocks with side dimensions of100 m× 100 m (see Figures 8–11 and Table II). The building depth is 15 m so that thecourtyards are 70 m deep (see Figure 8). The blocks are spaced apart such that the angle fordaylight is 45° as above (see Figures 10 and 11). The grid is also arranged as in TypologyA such that there are no north facades (see Figure 2, centre). There are 2 m deep balconies onall sides of the buildings, which provide direct access to an outdoor space for the occupants(see Figures 8 and 9). The building complex provides three to five apartments per floor andstaircase (see Figure 9). A building height of 7 floors was chosen, so the highest evacuationlevel is less than 22 m above ground. Thus the high-rise building limit is not exceeded andadditional fire protection measures are not required (according to OIB, 2015, pp. 2-6).

91

3535

Figure 4.Geometry oftypology A

231

Residentialbuilding

typologies

0 10 20 m

Figure 5.Typical floor plan oftypology A

N

Plot size:2×5,000m2

Street w

idth: 25m

90m

90m

38.9m

Figure 6.Urban integration oftypology A

232

SASBE7,3/4

Typology C. Typology C comprises single-family homes. This model was chosen forinvestigation as numerous studies have shown that this is the preferred housing type for alarge proportion of the population in many different parts of the world, for example inAustria and the USA (Zellmann and Mayrhofer, 2013, pp. 8-11 Belden Russonello andStewart LLC, 2011, pp. 17-19). In an attempt to investigate whether this desire could

Typology A

Number of floors 26Clear height of internal spaces 3 mBuilding height 91 mGlazed façade area (as seen from inside) 60%Site area (SA) 5,000 m²Total floor area (TFA) 31,850 m²Usable floor area (UFA) 22,295 m²Ground cover ratio 0.25Space efficiency factor (UFA/TFA) 0.7Floor to area ratio (FAR ¼ TFA/SA) 6.4Usable floor area to site area (UFA/SA) 4.5Dwellings per hectare (at 90 m² UFA/dwelling) 495Population Density (persons/ha, at 45 m² UFA/person) 990 p/ha

Table I.Specifications of

typology A

45°

Note: The buildings are spaced apart to allow a 45° daylight access angle

Figure 7.Schematic section

through typology A

10070

15

15

24.5

Figure 8.Geometry oftypology B

233

Residentialbuilding

typologies

0 10 20m

Note: The plan represents a quarter of the whole building

Figure 9.Typical floor plan oftypology B

N

25m

70m

Plot size:10,000 m2

Figure 10.Urban integration oftypology B

234

SASBE7,3/4

hypothetically be accommodated without the excessive use of resources, a compactsingle-family home typology on small plots was developed (see Figures 12–15 and Table III).It should be noted that this model does not represent the majority of single-familydwellingurban typologies employed in cities presently, with the major difference being the muchsmaller plot size. Nevertheless, it could arguably provide its occupants with the mainattributes responsible for the preference for the single-family home typology. The SA isapproximately 300 m2 and the buildings are laid out such that the sunlight access angle is27.5° (see Figures 14 and 15). Thus the spaces will receive more sunlight in winter thanthose in the typologies described above. The buildings are two-storey structures orientatedwith the long axis east west such that the main facades face directly north (N) and south (S).The house is designed as a two-storey building without a basement. Parking (carport) andstorage areas are located in a separate thermally unconditioned structure at the north side ofthe building (see Figure 13) and were not considered in the area and density calculations(see Table III). To reduce unwanted views between the houses and for optimal insolation allliving rooms are oriented to the south side (see Figure 13).

Construction materials dataFor better comparability all typologies employ the same building constructions and thermalproperties. Thermal mass is provided in the form of the exposed undersides of concrete

Typology B

Number of floors 7Clear height of internal spaces 3 mBuilding height 24.5 mGlazed façade area (as seen from inside) 60%Site area (SA) 10,000 m²Total floor area (TFA) 35,700 m²Usable floor area (UFA) 27,132 m²Ground cover ratio 0.51Space efficiency factor (UFA/TFA) 0.76Floor to area ratio (FAR ¼ TFA/SA) 3.57Usable floor area to site area (UFA/SA) 2.71Dwellings per ha (90 m² UFA/dwelling) 301Population density (45 m² UFA/person) 602 p/ha

Table II.Specifications of

typology B

45°19°

Note: The buildings are spaced apart to allow a 45° daylight access angle

Figure 11.Schematic section

through typology B

12.5

6.0

6.8

Figure 12.Geometry oftypology C

235

Residentialbuilding

typologies

Ground floor

Car port Storage

0 10m

First floor

Figure 13.Typical floor plans oftypology C

N

Plot size:300m2

Main street

width: 25m

11.5m

6m

7.5m

Figure 14.Urban integration oftypology C

27.5°

Note: The buildings are spaced apart to allow a 27.5° daylight accessangle

Figure 15.Schematic sectionthrough typology C

236

SASBE7,3/4

ceiling slabs. Properties of the building envelope are defined in: Tables IV–X. Wallconstructions are described from outside to inside, horizontal constructions from theuppermost to the lowermost layer.

Solar shading is taken into account via external blinds, which are lowered when theexternal temperature is greater than 24°C. The transmission factor for direct radiationvaries from 0.65 at a 0° incident angle to 0.00 at an incident angle of 45° or greater.

Typology C

Number of floors 2Clear height of internal spaces 2.5 mBuilding height 6.5 mGlazed area, south façade (as seen from inside) 60%Glazed area, north façade (inside) 10%Glazed area, east & west façade (inside) 0%Site area (SA) 300 m²Total floor area (TFA) 170 m²Usable floor area (UFA) 141 m²Ground cover ratio 0.28Space efficiency factor (UFA/TFA) 0.83Floor to area ratio (FAR ¼ TFA/UFA) 0.57Usable floor area to site area (UFA/SA) 0.47Dwellings per hectare (90 m² UFA/dwelling) 52Population density (45 m² UFA/person) 104 p/ha

Table III.Specifications of

typology C

External wallsMaterial Thickness (mm) λ (W/mK)

External plaster 5 0.500Thermal insulation 80 0.035Insulating brick 250 0.270Gypsum plastering 10 0.420U-value 0.30 (W/m²K)

Table IV.Layer structure of

external walls ( fromoutside to inside)

RoofMaterial Thickness (mm) λ (W/mK)

Thermal insulation 165 0.035Reinforced concrete 200 2.300U-value 0.20 (W/m²K)

Table V.Layer structureof roofs ( fromtop to bottom)

Internal floor slabsMaterial Thickness (mm) λ(W/mK)

Timber flooring 10 0.140Screed 60 1.150Mineral fibre 25 0.035Reinforced concrete 180 2.300U-value 0.90 (W/m²K)

Table VI.Layer structure ofinternal floor slabs

( from top to bottom)

237

Residentialbuilding

typologies

Internal loadsWith regard to internal gains, one person per 45 m² is assumed with a 50 per cent reductionof this occupation density between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. A constant heat output of 3.5 W/m²is assumed for electrical loads. It should be noted that a study carried out by Elsland et al.(2014) revealed that the contribution of internal heat gains to meeting thermal heat demandis often underestimated. Their survey of internal gains in a broad range of dwellings inEuropean residential buildings indicated a range between 3.8 and 6.6W/m2 averageconstant load, including heat gain from people (p. 37). The value of approx. 5.1 W/m2 in thisstudy lies in the middle of this range.

HVAC systemsWith regard to ventilation, 12.5 litres per second outdoor air supply per person is assumed,which equates to 0.4 air changes per hour for one person per 45 m² and a room height of2.5 m or 0.33 air changes per hour for a room height of 3 m. This is assumed to be achievedby a combination of a mechanical extract system with natural supply via elementsintegrated into the facade supplying 0.18 litres per second per m2 UFA, together with aconstant infiltration rate of 0.10 l/s per m2 UFA. In the common areas (staircase, corridors)

FenestrationDouble glazed argon-filled cavity low-e coating

U-value (total) 1.30 (W/m²K)SHGC 0.65

Table X.Assumptions for thefenestration

Party wallsMaterial Thickness (mm) λ(W/Mk)

Plasterboard 25 0.200Sound insulation 18 0.035Plasterboard 25 0.200U-value 0.18 (W/m²K)

Table VII.Layer structureof party walls

Ground floor slabMaterial Thickness (mm) λ (W/mK)

Timber flooring 10 0.140Screed 60 0.410Sound insulation 25 0.035Reinforced concrete 250 2.300Mineral fibre 125 0.035U-value 0.20 (W/m²K)

Table VIII.Layer structure of theground floor slab( from top to bottom,type C only)

Floor over garageLayer composition same as floor against ground temperature garage¼ external temp

U-value 0.20 (W/m²K)

Table IX.Assumptions for thefloor over the garage( from top to bottom,type A and B only)

238

SASBE7,3/4

an infiltration rate of 0.2 air changes per hour was assumed. To allow free cooling in hotweather, windows are assumed to be opened when the internal temperature is both greaterthan 24° C and greater than the external temperature.

Further assumptions regarding the building HVAC systems are as follows:

• heating set point (apartments): 20°C with night setback 16°C;

• cooling set point (apartments): 26°C;

• humidity control setpoints (apartments): 30 per cent min., 60 per cent max.;

• staircases and common areas are not thermally conditioned; and

• for the purposes of this study the temperature in the underground garages wasassumed to be the same as the outside temperature.

Simulated locationsDynamic thermal energy simulations were carried out for the following four locations inEurope:

(1) Helsinki, Finland 60°N.

(2) Dublin, Ireland 53°N.

(3) Vienna, Austria 48°N.

(4) Athens, Greece 38°N.

The four locations selected represent the wide diversity of different climates in Europe andwere chosen with the intention of obtaining insight into the effect of climatic conditions onthe results. Simulation results are shown in Figure 16 and in Tables XI–XIII.

Renewable energy productionThe renewable energy production potential via building integrated photovoltaic modules (PV)on the roof and the S, SW and SE facing facades was estimated for the various typologies (seeTables XVI–XVIII). For the estimation, the average annual insolation (I) on each surface wasmultiplied by the area of photovoltaics (PV) and an efficiency factor (η) of 0.15 resulting in theannual production potential (PP). The annual embodied energy (AEE) demand[7] was thenoffset against the PP and the divided by the UFA of the building which then results in thetotal annual energy production (TAEP), based on UFA.

The incident solar radiation on the variously orientated vertical facades and thehorizontal roof area was calculated with the IESVE suite. The AEE of the solar energyproduction system was assessed according to the Swiss norm SIA 2032:2010 (Swiss Societyof Engineers and Architects, 2010, 2013), based on a lifecycle of 30 years (see Table XV).

External electrical energy demand (EEED)The sum of the heat pump electrical energy demand and the electrical energy demand forlighting, ventilation, household appliances and DHWS, based on the assumptions outlinedabove, gives the total electrical energy demand for the building. The difference between thisvalue and the on-site renewable energy production (TAEP) gives the EEED for the varioustypologies and locations (see Table XIX and Figure 17). Negative values for EEED implythat the annual electrical energy production of the building integrated PV system exceedsthe annual electrical energy demand. This excess energy could be supplied to the grid orstored on site with a suitable storage system.

239

Residentialbuilding

typologies

ResultsThermal energy demandThe results of the simulations are given in Tables XI–XIII and are compared to each other inFigure 16. The simulation results show, that the single-family home typology (type C) hasthe highest thermal energy demand in all simulated climatic environments (22.1–85.2 kWh/m²UFAa, depending on location, see Table XIII), while the thermal energy demand for themulti-family typologies (type A and B) are very similar in all environments (differencesbetween 3 and 5 per cent, depending on location, see Tables XI and XII). The gap betweenthe multi-family and single-family types is the highest in Helsinki (37 per cent higher thanthe best result) and the lowest in Vienna (19 per cent higher than the best result,see Figure 16).

To better understand the influence of shading by the adjacent buildings the simulationswere also carried out for the three typologies using the Vienna climate data withoutconsideration of the neighbouring buildings with the results shown in Table XIV.As expected, the influence of shading on the thermal energy demand rises with the densityof the urban structure, described by the FAR (compare to Tables I–III).

Renewable energy productionAs could be expected, roof surfaces receive the highest incident solar radiation in allexamined locations, with rising intensity towards lower latitudes (between 940 and

Annual heating energydemand

Annual cooling energydemand

Annual thermal energydemandTypology B: perimeter block

development (kWh/m²UFA) (kWh/m²UFA) (kWh/m²UFA)

Helsinki 60°N 63.1 0.7 63.8Dublin 53°N 20.4 0.5 20.9Vienna 48°N 28.9 4.0 32.9Athens 38°N 2.2 14.9 17.1

Table XII.Thermal energydemand fortypology B

Annual heatingenergy demand

Annual coolingenergy demand

Annual thermalenergy demandTypology A: high

rise residential tower (kWh/m²UFA) (kWh/m²UFA) (kWh/m²UFA)


Table XI.Thermal energydemand fortypology A

Annual heating energydemand

Annual cooling energydemand

Annual thermal energydemandTypology C: single-family

home (kWh/m²UFA) (kWh/m²UFA) (kWh/m²UFA)


Table XIII.Thermal energydemand fortypology C

240

SASBE7,3/4

1,653 kWh/m², depending on location, see Tables XVI–XVIII, column I). Coherently thesingle-family home typology (type C) has the highest TAEP (87 to 165 kWh/m²UFAa,depending on location) and the high-rise typology (type A) the lowest (9 to 17.1 kWh/m²UFAa,depending on location). For detailed results see Tables XVI–XVIII, right column.

–120.0

–100.0

–80.0

–60.0

–40.0

–20.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

Helsinki 60°N Dublin 53°N Vienna 48°N Athens 38°N

kWh/

m2 U

FAa

Typology A Typology B Typology C

Figure 17.Total estimatedannual External

Electrical EnergyDemand (EEED)

for all investigatedtypologies and

locations

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Helsinki 60°N Dublin 53°N Vienna 48°N Athens 38°N

kWh/

m2 U

FAa

Typology A Typology B Typology C

Figure 16.Thermal energydemand for all

investigatedtypologies and

locations

TypologyEffect of shading on A (%) B (%) C (%)

Annual space heating energy demand +23 +14 +12Annual sensible cooling energy demand −36 −19 −11

Table XIV.Effect of

shading by theurban environment

on the thermalenergy demand

241

Residentialbuilding

typologies

External electrical energy demandType C is the only of the investigated typologies that has the potential to reach anet-zero energy standard in all investigated locations. The highest potential lies in Athens,where thermal energy demand is the lowest and incident solar radiation is the highest(−112.6 kWh/m²UFAa), the lowest potential lies in Helsinki, where thermal energy demand isthe highest and incident solar radiation is the lowest (−13.6 kWh/m²UFAa). The investigatedhigh density typologies do not reach net-zero energy standards under the given boundaryconditions (see Figure 17 and Table XIX).

DiscussionThe results show, that at the four locations studied, the choice of typology matters most inHelsinki, where the energy demand of the single-family home typology is nearly 40 per centhigher than in the best apartment building typology and least in Vienna, where it is less than 20per cent higher. If the specific UFA per person in the single-family home is higher than that inthe apartment building typologies, as is often the case in reality, these differences will be morepronounced. This can be explained by the low winter-temperatures in Helsinki and the highsurface-to-volume ratio of single-family homes, which leads to high transmission heat losses.

EE (MJ/m²) Lifespan AEEBuilding element Constr. Disp. Total (a) (MJ/m²) (kWh/m²∙a) Data source

Solar power system 2,800 0 2,800 30 93 26 SIA 2032Source: SIA, 2010, 2013

Table XV.Embodied energy (EE)and annual embodiedenergy (AEE) demandper m² of photovoltaicpanel area for solarpower systems

A AF PV I η PP AEE TAEPLocation Surface (m²) (−) (m²) (kWh/m²a) (−) (kWh/a) (kWh/a) (kWh/m²UFA∙a)

Typology AHelsinki Facade SW 3,185 0.30 956 501 0.15 71,806 24,843 2.1

Facade SE 3,185 0.30 956 487 0.15 69,799 24,843 2.0Roof 1,250 0.75 938 942 0.15 132,469 24,375 4.8Total 7,620 2,849 274,074 74,061 9.0

Dublin Facade SW 3,185 0.30 956 467 0.15 66,933 24,843 1.9Facade SE 3,185 0.30 956 448 0.15 64,210 24,843 1.8Roof 1,250 0.75 938 940 0.15 132,188 24,375 4.8Total 7,620 2,849 263,330 74,061 8.5

Vienna Facade SW 3,185 0.30 956 559 0.15 80,119 24,843 2.5Facade SE 3,185 0.30 956 565 0.15 80,979 24,843 2.5Roof 1,250 0.75 938 1,127 0.15 158,484 24,375 6.0Total 7,620 2,849 319,582 74,061 11.0

Athens Facade SW 3,185 0.30 956 773 0.15 110,790 24,843 3.9Facade SE 3,185 0.30 956 782 0.15 112,080 24,843 3.9Roof 1,250 0.75 938 1,653 0.15 232,453 24,375 9.3Total 7,620 2,849 455,324 74,061 17.1

Notes: The area of photovoltaic panels (PV) is the product of the surface area (SA) of the considered buildingsurface and the area factor (AF). The annual production potential (PP) is the product of the annual solarirradiation (I) and the efficiency factor (η). The total annual energy production (TAEP) is the annualproduction potential (PP) minus the annual embodied energy (AEE) divided by the usable floor area (UFA) ofthe building. Italic values represent the total TAEP of all investigated building surfaces and are factored intothe calculation of the EEED (see Table XIX)

Table XVI.Estimated annualproduction potential(PP), annual embodiedenergy (AEE) andtotal annual energyproduction (TAEP) ofa solar power systemwith an efficiency ofη¼ 0.15 for typologyA in differentclimatic contexts

242

SASBE7,3/4

A AF PV I η PP AEE TAEPLocation Surface (m²) (−) (m²) (kWh/m²a) (−) (kWh/a) (kWh/a) (kWh/m²UFA∙a)

Typology BHelsinki Facade SW 4,165 0.30 1,250 551 0.15 103,271 32,487 2.6

Facade SE 4,165 0.30 1,250 528 0.15 98,960 32,487 2.5Roof 5,100 0.75 3,825 942 0.15 540,473 99,450 16.3Total 13,430 6,324 742,704 164,424 21.3

Dublin Facade SW 4,165 0.30 1,250 518 0.15 97,086 32,487 2.4Facade SE 4,165 0.30 1,250 489 0.15 91,651 32,487 2.2Roof 5,100 0.75 3,825 940 0.15 539,325 99,450 16.2Total 13,430 6,324 728,062 164,424 20.8

Vienna Facade SW 4,165 0.30 1,250 617 0.15 115,641 32,487 3.1Facade SE 4,165 0.30 1,250 615 0.15 115,266 32,487 3.1Roof 5,100 0.75 3,825 1,127 0.15 646,616 99,450 20.2Total 13,430 6,324 877,524 164,424 26.3

Athens Facade SW 4,165 0.30 1,250 850 0.15 159,311 32,487 4.7Facade SE 4,165 0.30 1,250 851 0.15 159,499 32,487 4.7Roof 5,100 0.75 3,825 1,653 0.15 948,409 99,450 31.3Total 13,430 6,324 1,267,219 164,424 40.6


Table XVII.Estimated annual

production potential(PP), annual embodied

energy (AEE) andtotal annual energy

production (TAEP) ofa solar power systemwith an efficiency ofη¼ 0.15 for typologyB in different climatic

contexts

Location Surface (m²) (−) (m²) (kWh/m²a) (−) (kWh/a) (kWh/a) (kWh/m²UFA∙a)

Typology CHelsinki Facade S 75 0.30 23 687 0.15 2,319 585 12.3

Facade E+W 82 0.50 41 454 0.15 2,778 1,060.8 12.2Roof 85 0.90 77 942 0.15 10,809 1,989 62.6Total 242 140 15,907 3,635 87.0

Dublin Facade S 75 0.30 23 631 0.15 2,130 585 11.0Facade E+W 82 0.50 41 453 0.15 2,772 1,060.8 12.1Roof 85 0.90 77 940 0.15 10,787 1,989 62.4Total 242 140 15,688 3,635 85.5

Vienna Facade S 75 0.30 23 759 0.15 2,562 585 14.0Facade E+W 82 0.50 41 535 0.15 3,274 1,060.8 15.7Roof 85 0.90 77 1,127 0.15 12,932 1,989 77.6Total 242 140 18,768 3,635 107.3

Athens Facade S 75 0.30 23 1,009 0.15 3,405 585 20.0Facade E+W 82 0.50 41 739 0.15 4,523 1,060.8 24.6Roof 85 0.90 77 1,653 0.15 18,968 1,989 120.4Total 242 140 26,896 3,635 165.0


Table XVIII.Estimated annual

production potential(PP), annual embodied

energy (AEE) andtotal annual energy

production (TAEP) ofa solar power systemwith an efficiency ofη¼ 0.15 for typology

C in differentclimatic contexts

243

Residentialbuilding

typologies

At the same time, the investigated single-family home typology has the highest potential forbuilding integrated energy production. This is most pronounced in low latitudes, where theoverall solar potential is higher. This can be explained be the fact that the high surface-to-volume ratio of the single-family dwelling allows to install more photovoltaics on the buildingenvelope and the lower building densities lead to less mutual shading (see Table XIV).

These results show interesting implications regarding the choice of typology for the goal ofachieving zero-energy buildings, as even if the thermal energy demand could be reduced tozero, the apartment building typologies in the sort of urban context outlined above wouldseem to have difficulty achieving this goal in many European climate zones, as long as energyconsumption for household appliances is not reduced drastically (see Table XIX).

Seen from an urban perspective, the results suggest that net-zero energy urban areascould reach significantly higher densities in low latitudes with correspondingly high solarradiation levels than in higher latitudes: A net-zero urban area consisting of the threeinvestigated building typologies would require an increasing proportion of single-familyhomes (type C) with increasing latitude in order to reach a net-zero energy balance. In theclimate of Helsinki, the highest reachable density with a balanced share of energy demandand energy production would be 65 dwellings per hectare, while in the climate of Athens itwould be 216 dwellings per hectare (see Figure 18 and Table XX). Taking into considerationthat the roof area has the highest potential for building integrated energy production (seeTables XVI–XVIII), low-rise typologies with high densities seem particularly promising fornet-zero energy developments and should be further investigated.

ConclusionsThe following conclusions can be drawn from the work carried out in this study:

• The choice of building typology and corresponding urban density has a higherimpact on the specific energy demand based on UFA in cold climate conditions(Helsinki) than in warm and moderate climate conditions.

• The choice of building typology and corresponding urban density has a higherimpact on the potential for integrated renewable energy production in locations atlower latitudes.

(kWh/m²UFA∙a)Demand Supply Total

Location Heating and cooling Others Total TAEP EEED

Typology AHelsinki 20.5 45.0 65.5 9.0 56.6Dublin 6.7 45.0 51.7 8.5 43.2Vienna 10.6 45.0 55.6 11.0 44.6Athens 5.9 45.0 50.9 17.1 33.8

Typology BHelsinki 21.3 45.0 66.3 21.3 45.0Dublin 7.0 45.0 52.0 20.8 31.2Vienna 11.0 45.0 56.0 26.3 29.7Athens 5.7 45.0 50.7 40.6 10.1

Typology CHelsinki 28.4 45.0 73.4 87.0 −13.6Dublin 8.3 45.0 53.3 85.5 −32.2Vienna 12.7 45.0 57.7 107.3 −49.6Athens 7.4 45.0 52.4 165.0 −112.6

Table XIX.Total estimated annualexternal electricalenergy demand(EEED) for allinvestigated typologiesand locations

244

SASBE7,3/4

• The investigated apartment buildings have a lower operational energy demand thanthe single-family homes at all locations. In cold climate conditions (Helsinki) thisadvantage is most pronounced.

• The investigated single-family home typology has the highest potential forbuilding-integrated energy production at all locations. In low latitudes (Athens) thisadvantage is most pronounced.

• The combination of these results means that net-zero-energy developments can reachhigher densities in warmer, sunnier climates than in colder climates with lowerincident solar radiation.

OutlookTo fully understand the impact of building typology and corresponding urban morphologyon the energy demand of a city, further studies are required. Other uses besidesresidential use, such as offices, services, public buildings or industry as well as a mix of

63 (dw/ha) 65 (dw/ha)

85 (dw/ha) 90 (dw/ha)

99 (dw/ha) 108 (dw/ha)

167 (dw/ha) 216 (dw/ha)

Type A Type C Type B Type C

Helsinki

Dublin

Vienna

Athens

Note: The values under the pie charts representthe achieved densities in dwellings per hectare(dw/ha), based on 90 m2 UFA per dwelling

Figure 18.Required typology

mix to achieve a Net-Zero-Energy district,based on a total site

area of 100 ha.

245

Residentialbuilding

typologies

uses should be investigated to represent a wider spectrum of urban functions. Moretypologies should be investigated, particularly low-rise typologies seem to be particularlypromising for net-zero energy developments.

In order to assess the total energy performance of various urban morphologies, theembodied energy[8] of the various building typologies, as well as embodied andoperational energy demand for transport and infrastructure would also need to beconsidered in further studies.

Other issues such as the effect of the various typologies on the urban heat island effectare interesting areas for further research. Sensibility analyses should be carried out to betterunderstand the impact of different parameters, such as user behaviour, insulation level, orclimate change on the total energy performance.

Glossarya Annum (year)A AreaAEE Annual embodied energy

SA TFA total UFA total EEED total Dwellings dw/ha FAR(ha) (m²) (m²) (kWh/a) (−) (ha−1) (−)

HelsinkiType A 2.5 157,348 110,143 6,234,109 1,224 495 6.4Type C 97.5 552,669 458,390 −6,234,109 5,093 52 0.6Total 100 710,017 568,534 0 6,317 63 0.7Type B 5.0 177,603 134,978 6,074,007 1,500 301 3.6Type C 95.0 538,476 446,618 −6,074,007 4,962 52 0.6Total 100 716,078 581,596 0 6,462 65 0.7

DublinType A 7.3 464,008 324,806 14,031,599 3,609 495 6.4Type C 92.7 525,389 435,764 −14,031,599 4,842 52 0.6Total 100 989,397 760,569 0 8,451 85 1.0Type B 15.2 541,443 411,497 12,838,705 4,572 301 3.6Type C 84.8 480,723 398,718 −12,838,705 4,430 52 0.6Total 100 1,022,167 810,214 0 9,002 90 1.0

ViennaType A 10.5 668,355 467,849 20,866,051 5,198 495 6.4Type C 89.5 507,211 420,687 −20,866,051 4,674 52 0.6Total 100 1,175,566 888,535 0 9,873 99 1.2Type B 22.4 801,045 608,794 18,081,196 6,764 301 3.6Type C 77.6 439,517 364,540 −18,081,196 4,050 52 0.6Total 100 1,240,562 973,335 0 10,815 108 1.2

AthensType A 26.0 1,655,468 1,158,827 39,168,364 12,876 495 6.4Type C 74.0 419,398 347,854 −39,168,364 3,865 52 0.6Total 100 2,074,866 1,506,681 0 16,741 167 2.1Type B 65.9 2,352,080 1,787,580 18,054,562 19,862 301 3.6Type C 34.1 193,321 160,342 −18,054,562 1,782 52 0.6Total 100 2,545,400 1,947,923 0 21,644 216 2.5Notes: The table shows the necessary site area (SA), and corresponding total floor area (TFA total), usablefloor area (UFA total) and number of dwellings (at 90 m² UFA per dwelling) per building type and theresulting densities in dwellings per hectare (dw/ha) and floor area ratio (FAR). Italic values represent theresulting densities, based on a site are of 1 hectare, as shown in Figure 18

Table XX.Typology mixes toreach a net-zeroexternal electricalenergy demand(EEED) for allinvestigated locations

246

SASBE7,3/4

AF Area factorPP Annual production potentialBIPV Building integrated photovoltaicsCOP Coefficient of performanceDHWS Domestic hot water servicesdw/ha Dwellings per hectareE EastEE Embodied energyEEED External electrical energy demandFAR Floor area ratioha HectareHVAC Heating, ventilating, and air conditioningkWh Kilowatt hour(s)kWh/m²UFAa Kilowatt hours per m² UFA and yearMEP Mechanical, electrical, and plumbingN NorthPV PhotovoltaicsS SouthSA Site areaSE South Eastsurf. SurfaceSW South WestTAEP Total annual energy productionTFA Total floor areaUFA Usable floor areaW Westη Efficiency factor (output power/input power)λ Thermal conductivity (W/(mK))constr. constructiondisp. disposalI annual solar irradiation (kWh/(m²a))kWh/a kilowatt hours per yearkWh/m²a kilowatt hours per m² yearK Kelvinm metre(s)m2 square metre(s)p/ha persons per hectareMJ megajouleNE north-eastNW north-westSHGC solar heat gain coefficient (transmitted solar energy/incident solar energy)U-value overall heat transfer coefficient (W/(m²K))

Notes

1. Primary energy is defined as the energy that has not been subjected to any conversion ortransformation process.

2. Final energy is the energy supplied to the end user.

3. See: http://webtool.building-typology.eu/#bm

4. See: www.entranze.enerdata.eu/

247

Residentialbuilding

typologies

5. For the purposes of this study, thermal energy is defined as the energy, required for heating and coolingof conditioned rooms, excluding hot water production. It represents the demand, that has to be coveredby heating and cooling systems and does not include conversion and system distribution losses.

6. See: www.iesve.com/software/software-validation

7. The annual embodied energy demand is defined as the embodied energy of a product, divided byits life expectancy (in years).

8. Embodied energy is defined as the energy consumed by all the processes required to manufactureand deliver a product to site, as well as the energy required for its disposal at the end of its useful life.

References

Austrian Institute of Construction Engineering (OIB) (2015), “OIB guideline 2.3 – safety in case of fire inbuildings with a fire escape level in excess of 22 m”, available at: www.oib.or.at/sites/default/files/richtlinie_2.3_26.03.15.pdf (accessed 26 July 2017).

Belden Russonello and Stewart LLC (2011), “The 2011 community preference survey – whatAmericans are looking for when deciding where to live [analysis of a survey of 2071 Americanadults nationally conducted for the national association of realtors]”, available at: www.stablecommunities.org/sites/all/files/library/1608/smartgrowthcommsurveyresults2011.pdf(accessed 26 July 2017).

Brownstone, D. and Golob, T. (2009), “The impact of residential density on vehicle usage and energyconsumption”, Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 91-98, doi: 10.1016/j.jue.2008.09.002.

Buildings Performance Institute Europe (BPIE) (Ed.) (2011), “Europe’s buildings under the microscope: acountry-by-country review of the energy performance of buildings”, available at: http://bpie.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/HR_EU_B_under_microscope_study.pdf (accessed 25 September 2017).

Cali, D., Osterhage, T., Streblow, R. and Müller, D. (2016), “Energy performance gap in refurbishedGerman dwellings: lesson learned from a field test”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 127, pp. 1146-1158,doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.05.020.

Cody, B. and Loeschnig, W. (2011), “Urban Density and Energy”, TU Graz Research, Vol. 6, pp. 13-16,available at: www.tugraz.at/fileadmin/user_upload/tugrazInternal/News_Stories/Print/research/pdf/research_6_2011.pdf (accessed 26 July 2017).

Compagnon, R. (2004), “Solar and daylight availability in the urban fabric”, Energy and Buildings,Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 321-328, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2004.01.009.

Elsland, R., Peksen, I. and Wietschel, M. (2014), “Are internal heat gains underestimated in thermalperformance evaluation of buildings?”, Energy Procedia, Vol. 62, pp. 32-41, doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2014.12.364.

Ewing, R. and Cervero, R. (2010), “Travel and the built environment”, Journal of the American PlanningAssociation, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 265-294, doi: 10.1080/01944361003766766.

Karjalainen, S. (2016), “Should we design buildings that are less sensitive to occupant behaviour? Asimulation study of effects of behaviour and design on office energy consumption”, EnergyEfficiency, Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 1257-1270, doi: 10.1007/s12053-015-9422-7.

Loeschnig, W. (2012), “Finite Dense”, in Graz University of Technology (Eds), Graz ArchitectureMagazine, Vol. 8, Springer, Vienna, pp. 142-151.

Loga, T., Stein, B. and Diefenbach, N. (2016), “TABULA building typologies in 20 Europeancountries – making energy-related features of residential building stocks comparable”, Energyand Buildings, Vol. 132, pp. 4-12, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.06.094.

Martinaitis, V., Zavadskas, E.K., Motuzienė, V. and Vilutienė, T. (2015), “Importance of occupancyinformation when simulating energy demand of energy efficient house: a case study”, Energyand Buildings, Vol. 101, pp. 64-75, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.04.031.

Newton, P., Tucker, S. and Ambrose, M. (2000), “Housing form, energy use and greenhouse gasemissions”, in Williams, K., Burton, E. and Jens, M. (Eds), Achieving Sustainable Urban Form,Spon Press, London, pp. 74-83.

248

SASBE7,3/4

Nguyen, T.A. and Aiello, M. (2013), “Energy intelligent buildings based on user activity: a survey”,Energy and Buildings, Vol. 56, pp. 244-257, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.09.005.

Nichols, B. and Kockelman, K. (2014), “Life-cycle energy implications of different residential settings –recognizing buildings, travel, and public infrastructure”, Energy Policy, Vol. 68, pp. 232-242,doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.062.

Norman, J., MacLean, H. and Kennedy, C. (2006), “Comparing high and low residential density – life-cycle analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions”, Journal of Urban Planning andDevelopment, Vol. 132 No. 1, pp. 10-21, doi: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9488(2006)132:1(10).

Oikonomou, M. (2014), “The transformation of the urban block in the European city”, in Oliveira, V.,Pinho, P., Batista, L., Patatas, T. andMonteiro, C. (Eds),Our Common Future in UrbanMorphology,FEUP, Porto, pp. 484-497, available at: http://isuf2014.fe.up.pt/ISUF2014%20ebook.pdf (accessed26 July 2017).

Puurunen, E. and Organschi, A. (2013), “Multiplier effect: high performance construction assemblesand urban density in US housing”, in Khare, A. and Beckman, T. (Eds), Mitigating ClimateChange – The Emerging Face of Modern Cities, Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 183-206.

Schakib-Ekbatan, K., Çakıcı, F.Z., Schweiker, M. and Wagner, A. (2015), “Does the occupant behaviourmatch the energy concept of the building? – analysis of a German naturally ventilated officebuilding”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 84, pp. 142-150, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.10.018.

Statistics Austria (2009), “Gebäude- und Wohnungsregister”, available at: http://statcube.at (accessed26 July 2017).

Statistics Austria (2017a), “Housing conditions (main residences) by provinces (time series)”, availableat: www.statistik.at/web_en/statistics/PeopleSociety/housing/housing_conditions/079266.html(accessed 26 July 2017).

Statistics Austria (2017b), “Size of dwellings (main residences) by provinces (time series)”, available at:www.statistik.at/web_en/statistics/PeopleSociety/housing/housing_conditions/081236.html(accessed 26 July 2017).

Steemers, K. (2003), “Energy and the city: density, buildings and transport”, Energy and Buildings,Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 3-14, doi: 10.1016/s0378-7788(02)00075-0.

Stejskal, M., Bußwald, P., Ferk, H., Supper, S. and Tappeiner, G. (2011), “Bilanzierung der GrauenEnergie in Wohnbau und zugehoeriger Infrastruktur-Erschliessung – Bericht zu ArbeitspaketAP2 des Projekts ZERsiedelt (Balancing of grey energy in housing and associated infrastructuredevelopment – Report on work package 2 of the research project ZERsiedelt)”, available at:www.zersiedelt.at/zersiedelung-studien-oesterreich/AP2-zersiedelt-graue-energie-wohnbau.pdf(accessed 26 July 2017).

Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects (2010), Graue Energie von Gebaeuden [Grey Energy ofBuildings], SIA, Zurich.

Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects (2013), “Graue energie von Gebaeuden: Korrigenda C1 zuSIA 2032:2010 (grey energy of buildings: corrigenda C1 to SIA 2032:2010), SIA, Zurich”,available at: http://shop.sia.ch/8d7e837c-2888-4e04-b628-f36edbd1d39c/D/DownloadAnhang(accessed 26 July 2017).

Tereci, A., Ozkan, S. and Eicker, U. (2013), “Energy benchmarking for residential buildings”, Energyand Buildings, Vol. 60, pp. 92-99, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.12.004.

Uerge-Vorsatz, D., Eyre, N., Graham, P., Harvey, D., Hertwich, E., Jiang, Y., Kornevall, C., Majumdar, M.,McMahon, J., Mirasgedis, S., Murakami, S. and Novikova, A. (2012), “Energy end-use: buildings”,in Global Energy Assessment (GEA) (Ed.), Global Energy Assessment: Toward a SustainableFuture, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, NY, pp. 649-760.

Zellmann, P. and Mayrhofer, S. (2013), “Wohnsituation und Wohnwuensche – Ein eigenes Haus alsWunsch, aber auch fuer viele Wirklichkeit” (Housing Situation and Desires –An own House as aDesire, but also the Reality for Many), ift Forschungstelegramm, p. 4, available at: www.freizeitforschung.at/data/forschungsarchiv/2013/115.%20FT%204-2013_Wohnsituation.pdf(accessed 26 July 2017).

249

Residentialbuilding

typologies

Further readingChen, S., Yang, W., Yoshino, H., Levine, M., Newhouse, K. and Hinge, A. (2015), “Definition of occupant

behaviour in residential buildings and its application to behaviour analysis in case studies”,Energy and Buildings, Vol. 104, pp. 1-13, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.06.075.

About the authorsProfessor Brian Cody is Chartered Engineer specializing in the analysis and design of energyefficient cities, buildings and systems. He is Professor and Director of the Institute of Buildingsand Energy at Graz University of Technology since 2004, where his focus in research and teaching ison maximising the energy efficiency of buildings and cities and Visiting Professor at the Universityof Applied Arts in Vienna since 2005. He is the Founder and Principal of the consultancy EnergyDesign Cody, founded in 2010. Before his appointment as professor in Graz he was an AssociateDirector, Business Development Leader and Design Leader at ARUP and lectured at LeibnizUniversity in Hannover.

Wolfgang Loeschnig is Freelance Architect and a Lecturer at the Institute of Buildings and Energy,Graz University of Technology, since 2014. He is the Founder and Principal of the architecture officeUniversaldesign, founded in 2013, and is currently working on his PhD thesis on urban density andenergy efficiency.

Alexander Eberl is University Assistant at the Institute of Buildings and Energy, Graz Universityof Technology, since 2014. He holds a Master’s Degree in Architecture and is currently working on hisPhD thesis on the revitalisation of buildings of the era of Structuralism. Alexander Eberl is thecorresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htmOr contact us for further details: [email protected]

250

SASBE7,3/4

Criteria and barriers for theapplication of green building

features in Hong KongJayantha Wadu Mesthrige and Ho Yuk Kwong

Department of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University,Hung Hom, Hong Kong

AbstractPurpose –An understanding about the criteria determining the successful application of green features, andthe barriers to implementation is essential in order to promote and enhance green building development.The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, the criteria determining the success of GBFs; and second, thebarriers to implementing GBFs in Hong Kong.Design/methodology/approach – A multi-method approach comprising a comprehensive questionnairesurvey and a semi-structured group discussion with construction professionals, along with three case studieswas adopted to address these two issues.Findings – Findings suggest that although environmental performance is the most significant criterion, theliving quality of occupants and the costs of green features play a crucial role in determining the success oftheir application. However, the environmental aspects of buildings are not sufficient for rating or determiningthe greenness level of a building. As for barriers, the green cost implications; the structural unsuitabilityof the current stock of old buildings; and the lack of financial incentives were found to be crucial barrierspreventing the application of green features in the Hong Kong building sector.Originality/value – GBFs have received extensive attentions by the academia and industry. This paperused a mix method approach by exploring success criteria and barriers to implementing green features in thebuilding sector in Hong Kong. As green building development is still a contemporary subject of discussion,this study would be beneficial to decision makers as it identifies the criteria determining the success of greenbuilding adoption and barriers to implementation of such features. Hence, relevant stakeholders will havebetter understanding of the factors affecting the adoption of GBFs.Keywords Hong Kong, Green features, Barriers for green features, Environmental aspect,Green building appications, Green building criteriaPaper type Research paper

1. IntroductionA rapid widespread of green building features (GBFs) is seen around the world. Accordingto McGraw-Hill Construction (2013), more than 50 percent of global constructionstakeholders predicted that over 60 percent of their construction works would be green by2015. In Hong Kong, there has been an increasing but slow movement toward the designand development of green buildings over the past ten years. In order to ensure continuedgrowth and to further enhance the adoption of GBFs and technologies, it is important thatwe understand the challenges and barriers that clients and developers are facing in theiradoption. Likewise, an understanding of the criteria, which determine a successfulapplication of GBFs in the high-rise buildings context, is essential, if we are to promotegreen buildings in Hong Kong.

There are a number of reasons for and benefits attained by adopting and promotingGBFs in new developments. The top most benefits include enhanced occupant health dueto improved indoor environmental quality (IEQ) and healthier living space, energysavings and greater long-term cost savings/profits and most importantly the reduction ofgreenhouse gas emissions and hence the impact of buildings on the environment(McGraw-Hill Construction, 2013; Kwong, 2004). Many studies have concluded that GBFsprovide stakeholders, including developers, contractors and policymakers,with great opportunities to minimize the environmental impact of the building industry


Vol. 7 No. 3/4, 2018pp. 251-276

© Emerald Publishing Limited2046-6099

DOI 10.1108/SASBE-02-2018-0004

Received 2 February 2018Revised 19 April 2018

4 June 2018Accepted 6 June 2018


251

GBFs inHong Kong


(Carter and Fowler, 2008). A wide variety of GBFs, such as green-roof technologies(GRHCC, 2003); waste reduction technologies (Shen et al., 2009); solar powersystems (Huang and Wu, 2007); and technologically enhanced heating, ventilation andair-conditioning systems (UNEP, 2003) have been identified in the literature.

Governments and authorities across the world have been very active in promoting andimplementing a variety of GBFs, especially focusing on building projects. Green-rooftechnologies are one of the most popular across the world (Gregoire and Clausen, 2011;Fioretti et al., 2010). For example, more than 10 percent of houses in Germany possess greenroofs (Zhang et al., 2012). In fact, Germany is playing a leading role in promoting green-rooftechnologies (Zhang, Platten and Shen, 2011; Zhang, Shen and Wu, 2011). Among othercountries that are popular for green-roof applications include Poland, where manygreen-roof incentive programs have been launched (Liu and Baskaran, 2005). The city ofToronto (Banting et al., 2005) and the UK (Oberndorfer et al., 2007) are also at the forefrontwith green-roof technologies. Waste reduction technologies are another important greenfeature. Studies on waste minimization have highlighted the use of advanced technologies,in such as precast concrete, scaffolding and steel form and drywall partition panels(Shen and Tam, 2002; Poon et al., 2001; Poon, 2000). Waste prevention methods and systemshave been extensively documented in the literature (Shen and Tam, 2002; Faniran andCaban, 1998; McDonald, 1998; Poon, 1997; Graham and Smithers, 1996). Prefabrication isanother typical waste reduction technology. This technology has been adopted extensivelyby the Hong Kong Government over the past years, not only to improve buildability, butalso to minimize waste (Chiang et al., 2005). Another important green building technology isthat of renewable energy, such as solar power in buildings. Due to shortages in fossil energyand its greenhouse impact on the environment, the importance of and the necessity to userenewable energy is increasing (Huang and Wu, 2007).

In Hong Kong, there has been considerable effort to promote GBFs and technologies overthe past 10–15 years. These initiatives, mainly voluntary in nature, have been initiated byboth the government and private sector bodies (Wadu Mesthrige and Wan, 2013). Forexample, the government implemented an indoor air quality (IAQ) management program in2003 in order to improve IAQ and enhance public awareness of IAQ (HKSAR, 2011). Underthe scheme, the main feature was the introduction of a voluntary IAQ certification schemefor offices and public places. The government also introduced Joint Practice Notes – JointPractice Note 1 ( JPN1) in 2001 and Joint Practice Note 2 ( JPN2) in 2002 – to encourageproperty developers to embrace GBFs in their new developments. This policy was jointlyinitiated by the government’s Planning Department (PD) and BD. It was expected thatthese notes would encourage developers to embrace green features such as balconies,sky-gardens, sun shades and utility platforms in new developments. The main aim of JPNswas to encourage and give recognition to private sector efforts to promote sustainabledesign and construction practices.

In addition to the public sector, a considerable effort has been made to promote GBFs byprivate sector bodies in Hong Kong. For example, the Hong Kong Building EnvironmentalAssessment Method (HK-BEAM) society, which was established in 1996 and the Hong KongGreen Building Council, which was established in 2006, introduced two well-known greenbuilding certification schemes in order to provide greater recognition for green buildings.HK-BEAM, which is a voluntary assessment scheme, is the most commonly adopted form ofgreen certification in Hong Kong. The main aim of these two schemes is to promote theadoption and enhancement of green building standards and sustainable buildings in HongKong (Hong Kong Green Building Council, 2018).

However, it appears that despite all these significant efforts, the Hong Kong constructionindustry is lagging behind in the application and implementation of GBFs (Gou et al., 2013).Green building percentage in Hong Kong is far low not only in relation to European cities

252

SASBE7,3/4

such as London and Paris (percentage is 68 and 64 percent, respectively), but also comparedto cities in the region. For example, 30 and 15 percent penetration rates of green buildingsare reported in Singapore and Shanghai, respectively, while the rate in Hong Kong is only4 percent (Hill, 2017). There seems to be various obstacles hindering its application in HongKong (Tam et al., 2012). Comprehensive studies, however, examining obstacles and criteriarelevant to the adoption of green building technologies in Hong Kong have been very limitedin number. In fact, a study addressing both the criteria and barriers has been never made inHong Kong. As a result, we have a limited understanding of the factors affecting theadoption of GBFs. In undertaking a comprehensive study of these affecting factors, thisstudy makes a timely contribution. Specifically, the study aims to answer the followingtwo questions:

RQ1. What are the criteria, which determine a successful application of GBFs?

RQ2. What are the obstacles preventing successful applications?

The following section provides a comprehensive literature review, with special reference tothe barriers and criteria concerned. In the section after that the data sources, modeling anddata analyses are described. In the penultimate section, the empirical results obtained from aquestionnaire survey, face-to-face group discussions and case study analyses are presented.The final section concludes with the findings.

2. Literature review2.1 Overall criteria of determining successful GBFsNumerous criteria for assessing GBFs have been adopted globally. Well-known greencertification schemes such as HK-BEAM plus, Leadership in Energy and EnvironmentalDesign (LEED) and Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method(BREEM) provide comprehensive platforms for assessing green features in buildings, asreflected in Table I. Currently, green application assessments mainly relate to environmentalfactors, even though the status of greenness of green buildings are significantly influencedby ecological, economic and social factors (Sobek et al., 2009, cited in Mansour and Radford,2014). It is necessary, therefore, to take multiple perspectives into account when establishinga comprehensive set of criteria for determining whether a green feature application issuccessful.

The report of theWorld Green Building Council (2013) emphasized that the condition andgreenness status of a building is driven by the needs and expectations of developers, ownersand tenants, which reflect not only pure environmental elements, but also various costs andbenefits elements. Developers are generally concerned with construction cost, expectedfuture sales of flats and the payback period (Issa et al., 2015). Owners are mostly concernwith the occupancy rate, rent and sales of property, future operational and maintenanceissues, whilst tenants are primarily concerned with living quality, future operational andmaintenance costs of the flat (World Green Building Council, 2013). Hence, the concerns ofall three parties should be taken into consideration when determining whether a greenbuilding is successful. This study reviewed the most recent relevant studies and identifiedfour main criteria, which must be met by successful green buildings, each with severalsub-criteria. As seen in Table I, they are design and construction, costs and profits, livingquality and environmental performance.

2.2 Design and construction attributesGreen building design and construction is more complicated than that of conventionalbuildings as green design and construction requires the consideration of alternativematerials and systems (Hwang and Tan, 2012a, b). Thus, instead of merely considering the

253

GBFs inHong Kong

Key

references

Criteria/

factors

World

Green

Building

Coun

cil

(2013)

Hwang

etal.

(2015)

Heerw

agen

(2000)

Hong

Kong

Green

Building

Coun

cil

(2016a,

b,c)

McG

raw-Hill

Constructio

n(2013)

Kats

(2003)

Burnett

etal.

(2008)

Alexia

and

Venters

(2010)

Geissler

(2013)

Usm

anand

Gidado

(2015)

Roychow

dhury

etal.(2015)

Mansour

and

Radford

(2014)

Biswas

etal.

(2009)

Ndu

kaand

Ogu

nsanmi

(2015)

Aug

enbroe

andPearce

(2000)

Designan

dconstructio

nC1

Design

difficulty

||

|

C2Levelo

fbu

ildability

|

C3Project

managem

ent

difficulty

||

C4Innovativ

e/

attractiv

edesign

||

||

|

Costan

dprofits

C5Initial

design

and

constructio

ncost

||

||

||

|

C6Fu

ture

maintenance

and

operation

cost

||

||

||

||

C7Fu

ture

cost

saving

s|

||

C8Property

value

||

||

(con

tinued)

Table I.Criteria for successfulapplication of greenbuilding features

254

SASBE7,3/4

Key

references

Criteria/

factors

World

Green

Building

Coun

cil

(2013)

Hwang

etal.

(2015)

Heerw

agen

(2000)

Hong

Kong

Green

Building

Coun

cil

(2016a,

b,c)

McG

raw-Hill

Constructio

n(2013)

Kats

(2003)

Burnett

etal.

(2008)

Alexia

and

Venters

(2010)

Geissler

(2013)

Usm

anand

Gidado

(2015)

Roychow

dhury

etal.(2015)

Mansour

and

Radford

(2014)

Biswas

etal.

(2009)

Ndu

kaand

Ogu

nsanmi

(2015)

Aug

enbroe

andPearce

(2000)

Living

quality

C9IEQ

||

||

||

||

||

||

|C1

0Occup

ants’

satisfaction

||

||

|

C11

Occup

ants’

health

||

||

||

C12

Occup

ants’

productiv

ity|

||

|

Environmentalprotection

C13

Site

aspects

||

||

||

||

||

C14

Material

aspects

||

||

||

||

||

|

C15

Water

use

||

||

||

||

|C1

6Energyuse

||

||

||

||

||

Table I.

255

GBFs inHong Kong

environmental performance aspects, the design and construction attributes of GBFs shouldalso be considered because these may impose additional difficulties, lengthening theduration of construction. For example, Hwang et al. (2015) found that project-related factorsand design team-related factors are the two major causes of delay to green building projectsin Singapore.

The success of a GBF application is greatly influenced by the degree of design,construction and project management difficulty. The success of GBF in the study refers tothe building performance in operation. According to the Hong Kong Green Building Council(2016a), innovative design can be crucial to a successful green building application.Therefore, innovative design is identified as another significant success criterion. As shownin Table I, following the comprehensive review of the literature on design and constructionaspects, four sets of sub-criteria that affect the successful application of green features wereidentified: “Level of design difficulty,” “Level of buildability,” “Level of project managementdifficulty” and “Innovative/attractive design.”

2.3 Cost and profits“Cost” is another important success criterion. Green features applications are perceived ascostlier than conventional buildings. However, green buildings significantly lower operatingcosts. For example, on average, cost savings of the order of 25–30 percent is possible in thelong-run (Kats, 2003); with lower maintenance costs, on average, by 8–9 percent. This enhancesproperty values by around 7.5 percent and return of investment by around 6.6 percent (Burnettet al., 2008). According to the World Green Building Council (2013), the major concerns ofstakeholders in the construction industry relate to costs and property values. For example,Morri and Soffietti (2013) emphasized that cost saving is the most significant criterionunderlying successful green features applications. In Table I, four sets of sub-criteria identifiedunder the category of costs and profits are: “Initial design and construction cost,” “Futuremaintenance and operation cost,” “Future cost savings” and “Property value.”

2.4 Living qualityThe living quality of occupants is a significant criterion in determining the success of aGBFs application. By highlighting the impact of green features on occupants’ health andproductivity, Heerwagen (2000) illustrated the importance of occupant satisfaction, as aGBF. Bond and Perrett (2012) found that tenant satisfaction and productivity are the mostinfluential drivers, among the ten most important drivers, that determine the successfulapplication of a green features application. Improvement of living quality is greatlydetermined by green features design quality. Hence, the design and application of GBFs arestrongly associated with improvements in IEQ parameters including air quality,temperature control and day lighting. Thus, there is growing evidence that greenbuildings have a positive impact on occupant productivity and quality of life.

There is also further evidence suggesting that green features have positive effects onoccupant health and comfort (Alexia and Venters, 2010). They showed that builtenvironment performance have a significant influence on health and quality of life. Refer toTable I for a comprehensive review of studies related to this aspect, and the four sets ofcriteria identified which determine successful application of green features: “IndoorEnvironmental Quality,” “Occupants’ satisfaction,” “Occupants’ health” and “Occupants’productivity.”

2.5 Environmental performanceThe adoption of green features in an environmentally conscious manner markedly reducesite disturbance, with no disruption of the land, water, energy resources and all other

256

SASBE7,3/4

natural resources in and around the building (Gottfried, 1996). Green features adoptionembraces practices and processes that are environmentally accountable and responsible,while using resources efficiently throughout the building life cycle. According to Nduka andOgunsanmi (2015), the most important criteria defining an application of GBFs areenvironmental, energy and material conservation and site sustainability. Among all thecriteria that determine green features applications; however, “energy efficiency” is seen asthe most critical element (Isa et al., 2015; McGraw-Hill Construction, 2013).

HK BEAM plus, LEED and BREEM are popular schemes to assess the success of GBFsapplications. HK BEAM Plus, for example, mainly covers the six aspects of site, materials,energy use, water use, IEQ and innovations, in assessing the environmental performance ofa building (Hong Kong Green Building Council, 2016b). As seen in Table I, most recentenvironmental performance studies identified four factors influence energy performance ofa building: “Site aspects,” “Material aspects,” “Water use” and “Energy use.”

2.6 Obstacles to GBFs application in Hong KongThe application of green features is not happening smoothly due to various challenges andbarriers in many countries in the world (Chan et al., 2016). There are many such barriers.According to Tam et al. (2012), cost is an important barrier including initial building costs thatarise from the use of energy efficient systems, the difficulty of purchasing green materialslocally, higher costs of green construction materials, higher costs of the design and installationof green features and the time-consumed in adopting green design procedures. Zhang et al.(2012) also identified six major barriers to extensive green-roof applications in Hong Kong.There is a lack of public promotion, lack of incentives provided by the government, highmaintenance costs, lack of awareness, buildings are too old and technical difficulties. Thoughthis study only focused on green-roof applications, some of the obstacles identified also reflectthe overall difficulties in adopting green features in a building.

In a Singapore study, Hwang and Tan (2012a, b) identified five most important barriers.These are: first, high cost premiums for green construction; second, lack of project teaminterest; third, the cost of green building practices; fourth, lack of reliable green buildingsresearch on their benefits; and fifth, lack of client interest and lack of market demand.Similarly, Samari et al. (2013), based on a Malaysian study, found that a major barrier wasthe lack of financial incentives to cover high upfront costs. In echoing the same view, Bandyet al. (2007) found that high upfront cost caused by new design and technology is the mostcritical obstacle to green building development in the USA. The report issued byDodge Data & Analytics (2016) formerly McGraw-Hill Construction stated that there arefour significant barriers to the adoption of GBFs in general. They are: first, higher perceivedfirst costs; second, lack of public awareness; third, lack of political support or incentives; andfourth, perception that green is for high-end projects, as more prominent obstacles.This brief review of literature helped the authors to identify and the cluster barriers into thethree main categories: cost implications, project feasibility, and market condition and trend(see Table II). These three categories are discussed in the following sub-sections.

2.6.1 Cost implication. A number of studies identified various cost elements as thelargest barrier to the adoption of green features in buildings (Hwang and Ng, 2013; Alrashedand Asif, 2012; Iwaro and Mwasha, 2010; Jason, 2009). Cost efficiency is considered to be themost significant, among all other factors (Hasan and Zhang, 2016). When compared toconventional buildings, green buildings are usually associated with higher initial design andconstruction costs (Turner Construction Company, 2005; McGraw-Hill Construction, 2006).In addition, there are various risks and uncertainties involved in the design and approvalprocesses of green applications, which require a comprehensive contingency sum in thebudget allocation (Qian et al., 2015). A similar finding was recorded in a study focusing onthe USA and Hong Kong, in which the initial cost was found to be most critical in green

257

GBFs inHong Kong

Key

references

Barriers

Tam

etal.

(2012)

Zhang

etal.

(2012)

Hwang

etal.

(2015)

Samari

etal.

(2013)

Bandy

etal.

(2007)

Jason

(2009)

McG

raw-Hill

Constructio

n(2013)

Qian

etal.

(2015)

Gün

doğan

(2012)

Chan

etal.

(2016)

Zhang

and

Wang

(2013)

Zhang,

Plattenand

Shen

(2011);Z

hang

,Sh

enandWu(2011)

Lipp

aiová

and

Sebestyen

(2013)

Costim

plication

B1

Highdesign

cost

||

||

||

||

B2

Highconstructio

nandmaterialcost

||

||

||

||

||

|

B3

Highmaintenance

andoperationcost

||

|

Projectfeasibility

B4

Unfam

iliar

project

managem

ent

||

|

B5

Greater

constructio

ntechnology

requ

irem

ent

||

||

||

||

B6

Agedand

structural

incapabilityof

existin

gbu

ildings

|

Marketcond

ition

andtrend

B7

Lack

offin

ancial

incentives

provided

bygovernment

||

||

||

|

B8

Lack

ofreliable

evidence

ongreen

build

ingbenefits

||

||

B9

Lack

ofmarket

demandand

interest

||

||

||

Table II.List of barriers/obstacles in adoptinggreen features

258

SASBE7,3/4

applications (Ahn et al., 2013). The long green buildings payback period generally motivatesdevelopers to opt for conventional buildings (Mosly, 2015). In addition to initial costs, highmaintenance cost is also a barrier (Latief et al., 2017). For example, a green roof may beassociated with higher maintenance costs due to the need for regular irrigation and pruning(Mayor, 2008). Our comprehensive literature review identified the three main barriersrelated to costs, as summarized in Table II, of “High design cost,” “High construction andmaterial cost” and “High maintenance and operation cost.”

2.6.2 Project feasibility. Project complexity increases by adopting GBFs. In the literature,project management and construction difficulties have been regarded as barriers to greenfeatures applications (e.g. Zhang, Platten and Shen, 2011; Zhang, Shen and Wu, 2011). For asuccessful implementation of green initiatives, advanced project management methods,tools, practices and techniques need to be developed and deployed (Sabini, 2016). Thecomplexity of the technologies related to green applications is the most significant challenge(Hasan and Zhang, 2016). The same view was echoed by Zhang, Platten and Shen (2011) andZhang, Shen and Wu (2011) by illustrating the complexity of the construction techniquesand processes associated with the adoption of green technologies. Thus, it is necessary toensure that all project management personnel are competent and technically trained. Thosethree barriers related to project feasibility identified by the literature review are summarizedin Table II, consist of “Unfamiliar project management requirements,” “Greater constructiontechnology requirement” and “The age and structural incapacity of existing buildings.”

2.6.3 Market condition and trend. Prevailing market condition affects the willingnessand the motivation of developers to apply GBFs (Gou et al., 2013). In China, for example,public interest in green building application is low, and occupants and owners are thereforenot willing to invest in green applications as there are no incentives available (Zhang andWang, 2013). Developers of green buildings, in addition, must meet strict green featuresregulations (Qian et al., 2015). Governments have a crucial role to play in promoting greenfeatures by providing financial and other incentives. The lack of financial incentives andawareness programs by the government and other relevant authorities constitutes a strongbarrier to the construction of green buildings ( Jason, 2009). The literature review helped usto identify the three major barriers (with their sub-categories) related to market conditionsand trends, as summarized in Table II of “Lack of government financial incentives,” “Lack ofreliable evidence on green building benefits” and “Lack of market demand and interest.”Table II illustrates nine possible barriers to the implementation of green featuresapplications. These barriers are also relevant to Hong Kong’s construction industry.

2.7 Benefits of GBFsLikewise, green technologies and systems must be proven reliable if efficientimplementation outcomes are to be produced (Hwang and Ng, 2013). According to Zhangand Wang (2013), many Chinese clients are reluctant to invest in green buildings becausethey have a little or no knowledge about the benefits of green applications and the lack ofmarket transparency. Furthermore, the majority of Chinese people are comfortable withtheir present life style and therefore have no strong demand for green applications (Zhangand Wang, 2013). This can only be corrected by government awareness programs. Otherresearchers have also noted numerous benefits of green buildings. Such as green buildingcost is lower than conventional method and saves energy as demonstrated by (Hydes andCreech, 2000), provide financial incentives, generate higher rental income, helped reduceoperating cost (Yates, 2001; Kats, 2003; Tzschentke et al., 2004; Miller et al., 2008; Furr, 2009;Eichholtz et al., 2013; Windapo, 2014), efficient utilization of resources, improve overallhealth, comfort and productivity of occupants and reduce environmental impact (Ries et al.,2006; Furr, 2009; Windapo, 2014).

259

GBFs inHong Kong

3. Research methods3.1 Data and samplingA mix method design was used for data collection (Zou et al., 2014). For example, the datawere collected through a comprehensive literature review, a questionnaire survey, casestudies and face-to-face interview discussions with building practitioners. In this study, theresearcher used a snowball sampling approach and selected experts who are knowledgeableand have experience about the topic. The aim of the questionnaire survey was to identifyand investigate those criteria relevant to determining successful green buildings and thosebarriers inhibiting the adoption of GBFs in Hong Kong. Three case studies were thenemployed to demonstrate those criteria and those barriers.

3.2 Questionnaire surveyTo identify the significance of the barriers and the most important success criteria, acomprehensive paper-based questionnaire survey was conducted (see the Appendix for asample questionnaire). Paper-based questionnaires are very effective in maximizingresponse rate (Fellows and Liu, 2015). The questionnaire consisted two main sections: first,criteria, which determine a successful green building; and second, barriers to theimplementation of green building. The literature review helped us to identify 16 greenbuilding criteria, which determine the application of successful GBFs (see Table I). Thesecriteria are categorized under the four main aspects of building: first, design andconstruction, second, cost and profits, third, occupant living quality and fourth,environmental protection. Likewise, from the literature review, nine barriers/challengesinhibiting the implementation of green buildings have been identified (see Table II).These barriers fall under the three main categories of building: first, cost implications,second, project feasibility and third, market conditions/trend. The questionnaire wasadministered to the developers, contractors, consultant companies and governmentdepartments representing the architectural, surveying and engineering fields andacademia. This provided us with a rich range of different views, enabling new insightsinto GBFs applications.

The survey was administered from July to October 2016 through mail and e-mail.Convenience sampling (a type of nonprobability sampling) was employed in this study dueto easy accessibility of the participants, their proximity to the researchers, availability at theresearch period and the willingness of the target respondents to participate in the study(Dörnyei, 2007). Therefore, there was no predetermined population size for the survey.Hence, a total of 473 questionnaires were distributed, with 198 completed and returned. As aresult of frequent reminders, the research team was able to secure a response rate of41 percent. A pilot study involving a group of six construction professionals was conductedto fine tune the questionnaire. The questionnaire was sent to these professionals and theirviews were obtained first. To further fine tune the questionnaire, face-to-face discussionswere then held with three of them to receive their opinions on the questionnaire.

Some questions were of the rank-in-order type where respondents were asked to rank thefactors in order of significance (1¼ highest significance). The respondents were then askedto rank the relative significance of each barrier to green building implementation in HongKong. In another part of the questionnaire, they were asked to rank those criteriadetermining whether a green building application was successful. Weightings were appliedin reverse to each ranking (e.g. for a rank order from 1 to 3, rank 1 has the highest weightingof 3, while rank 3 has a weighting of 1). The sum of the weighted responses was then dividedby the total number of responses. Lastly, the overall importance of each factor is expressedby using the mean rating (Ali and Al Nsairat, 2009). In some rating type questions, aLikert scale was used. Respondents were asked to rate the factors on a scale ranging from 1(least important) to 5 (most important).

260

SASBE7,3/4

A relative importance index (RII) was employed to numerically represent respondentopinions data. This has been widely used by researchers in the field of construction andproject management (Gündüz et al., 2013). The relative importance of each barrier wascalculated using the formula:

Relative importance index RIIð Þ ¼P

wAN

; 0pRIIp1ð Þ; (1)

where w¼ sum of the ratings given to each barrier by the respondents (ranging from 1 to 5),A¼ highest possible score (5 in this case), and N ¼ total number of responses.

3.3 Face-to-face group interview discussionsThe questionnaire survey was followed by two face-to-face group interview discussionswith two groups of construction professionals, who have extensive experience in theHong Kong construction industry, to seek their opinions and insights about GBFsapplication in Hong Kong. The industry experts were carefully selected and they held seniorand middle management positions. Over 90 percent of them possessed more than ten yearsof working experience in the building industry with some good knowledge about greenbuilding projects (Table III). One group consists of three professionals/building surveyors(two from the BD, one from Architectural Services Department). The other group consistedof two consultants/senior architects/designers ( from Architectural Services Department)and one academic (Assistant Professor from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University). Theseprofessionals were selected from among the questionnaire survey respondents. The mainaim of these face-to-face interview discussions was to cross-check the survey findings and toalso obtain a deeper understanding of the barriers and criteria relevant to implementingGBFs. These interview discussions allowed the research team to obtain the perceptions andopinions of professionals in more detail on the following questions:

RQ1. What are the most significant criteria defining a recognized green building?

RQ2. What are the most significant barriers to adopting GBFs in Hong Kong?

RQ3. How do the general public and property owners look at green buildings? Do theyappreciate green buildings and happy to pay more for them?

Organization Experience

Group 1Professional 1 − building surveyor Buildings department 20 years in construction fieldProfessional 2 – building surveyor(certified BEAM professional)

Buildings department Over 10 years in construction field

Professional 3 – consultant Architectural servicesdepartment

7 years in building industry

Group 2Professional 1 – senior architect Architectural services

department15 plus years in the building industry

Professional 2 – senior designer Architectural servicesdepartment

12 plus years in the building industry

Professional 3 – assistantprofessor

Hong KongPolytechnicUniversity

8 years in both private and public sector in thebuilding surveying and construction field

Table III.Professionals

background details

261

GBFs inHong Kong

RQ4. What is your opinion on the provision of incentives by the government as a meansof promoting green features applications in Hong Kong?

RQ5. Can you comment on the future of green building applications in Hong Kong?

RQ6. Are there any special mechanisms or steps that the authorities should take toenhance green building applications in Hong Kong?

These face-face interview discussions, not only helped to triangulate the questionnairesurvey findings, but also contributed to a solid conclusion on the challenges of adoptingGBFs applications in the Hong Kong construction industry. A respondent is identified by aGR (group) code. For example, GR11 (group 1, respondent 1), GR12 (group 1, respondent 2),GR13 (group 1, respondent 3), GR21 (group 2, respondent 1), GR22 (group 2, respondent 2)and GR23 (group 2, respondent 3). Each professional expressed their opinions on thequestions put forwarded by the interviewer (the research team).

3.4 Case studiesFinally, three case studies were made to reinforce and consolidate the findings of thequestionnaire survey and the group interview discussions. These cases also helped to identifythe main GBFs that are popular in Hong Kong. The three case study buildings chosen,certified by the HK-BEAM plus scheme, were from different building sectors: first, ZeroCarbon Building – GIC (government, institutional and community) building; second, HysanPlace – commercial building and third, Kwai Shing West Estate – residential building.All three projects have been rated as BEAM Plus platinum – the first two projects came underBEAM Plus for new buildings, and the last one under BEAM Plus for existing buildings.Details of these projects are summarized in Table IV.

4. Results and discussionPrior to the analysis, a reliability test (Cronbach statistic) on the items/variables used in theanalysis was performed. The purpose of this test was to verify the consistency andreliability of the responses under the Likert scale. Reliability is generally established if theCronbach statistic is greater than 0.6 (Santos, 1999; Malhotra, 1993). A Cronbach’s αreliability analysis showed that the calculated coefficient of the questionnaire survey was0.896. Thus, the five-point Likert scale adopted was consistent and reliable at the 5 percentsignificance level in the questionnaire survey. Thus, we consider that all the items/variablesincluded in the study meet the necessary reliability criteria.

4.1 Criteria of determining successful GBFs applicationTable V summarizes the RII results for the criteria, which determine successful GBFsapplications in Hong Kong. Nearly, 97 percent of the respondents agree or strongly agreethat “energy usage” is the most significant factor, with a RII of 0.931. Findings of thestructured group discussions held with professionals supported this finding. For example,according to two professionals in group 1 (GR11 and GR13), energy consumption or energysaving aspect is the most significant criterion in determining successful green buildingapplications. Their key criterion is that energy consumption and green design areinseparable. A green building is always an energy saving building, according to them. GR13,in particular, held this view strongly. This finding is also in line with the survey finding ofMcGraw-Hill Construction (2013), in which “reduction in energy use” was considered themost significant environmental reason for adopting green features. This is especially trueand significant in the high-rise high-density context, such as in Hong Kong, where thebuilding industry accounts for some 90 percent of the electricity consumption and nearly60 percent of total GHG emissions (Hong Kong Government, 2015).

262

SASBE7,3/4

“Occupants’ satisfaction” and “future maintenance and operation cost” were ranked as thesecond and third most significant factors, respectively, in determining the successful applicationof green features in buildings. This clearly indicates that end users’ needs and comfort, and theirperspectives play an important role in determining and rating a green building. Thus, greenfeatures in a building should satisfy occupant or end user needs. This finding is largelyconsistent with previous studies. For example, Heerwagen (2000) professed that green buildingswould be more popular in the market if the potential tenants had positive and exciting feelingstoward green features. He further mentioned that the comfort level of owner and tenant play animportant role in promoting and enhancing the awareness of green buildings in a society.A survey done by the US Green Building Council also found that many of its members were ofthe view that sustainable building designs will be more popular once the human benefits(occupant benefits) are recognized (cited in Heerwagen, 2000). The importance of occupant

Zero Carbon Building Hysan Place Kwai Shing West Estate

Address 8 Sheung Yuet Road, KowloonBay, Kowloon, Hong Kong

500 Hennessy Road,Causeway Bay

Kwai Chung, NewTerritories, Hong Kong

Building type Government, institution andcommunity (GIC)

Commercial Residential

No. of blocks and storeys 2 blocks, 3 storeys 1 block, 40 storeys 10 blocks, 7–25 storeysProject completion year 2012 2012 Original: 1975

Upgrade: 2016Developer Construction Industry Council Hysan Development

Company LimitedHong Kong HousingAuthority

Contractor Gammon Construction Limited Gammon ConstructionLimited

New Hopes ConstructionCo Limited

Green buildingclassification

BEAM Plus New BuildingsFinal Platinum

BEAM Plus NewBuildings FinalPlatinum

BEAM Plus ExistingBuildings Final Platinum

Source: Hong Kong Green Building Council (2014, 2016a, b, c)Table IV.

Project details

Percentage ofrespondents’ rating

Code Criteria ⩾4 3 ⩽2 Relative importance index Rank

C16 Energy use 96.552 3.448 0.000 0.931 1C10 Occupants’ satisfaction 89.655 10.345 0.000 0.897 2C6 Future maintenance and operation cost 89.655 6.897 3.448 0.883 3C9 Indoor environmental quality (IEQ) 93.103 6.897 0.000 0.866 4C14 Material aspects (e.g. waste reduction,

use of sustainable materials) 84.483 15.517 0.000 0.859 5C13 Site aspects (e.g. pollution reduction,

effects on neighborhood) 82.759 17.241 0.000 0.841 6C11 Occupants’ health 79.310 20.690 0.000 0.834 7C15 Water use 84.483 15.517 0.000 0.831 8C7 Future cost savings 67.241 25.862 6.897 0.807 9C5 Initial design and construction cost 79.310 17.241 3.448 0.800 10C2 Level of buildability (ease of construction) 68.966 13.793 17.241 0.759 11C8 Property value 62.069 24.138 13.793 0.745 12C12 Occupants’ productivity 58.621 41.379 0.000 0.738 13C4 Innovative/attractive design 48.276 44.828 6.897 0.724 14C1 Level of design difficulty 34.483 41.379 24.138 0.634 15C3 Level of project management difficulty 20.690 39.655 39.655 0.555 16

Table V.Ranking of the criteria

of successful greenbuilding features

application

263

GBFs inHong Kong

satisfaction, as a crucial green building success factor, is further supported by the result that 93percent of the respondents agree that “indoor environmental quality (IEQ)” is very significant,with an RII of 0.866. IEQ was ranked fourth in the overall ranking list.

Respondent concerns about “low maintenance and operation cost” that tenants andowners perceive that the maintenance of green features is costly. Though previous researchwork has proved that green designs go hand in hand with long-term lower maintenancecosts (e.g. McGraw-Hill, 2013; Alexia and Venters, 2010; Kats, 2003), this finding runscounter to that. A professional (GR12) in the face-to-face group discussion also perceivedoperational and maintenance costs as the most essential criterion. One reason, as pointed outby the particular professional in the discussion, is that people fear that green features, forinstance, a green roof will require frequent regulation irrigation and pruning of plants.Maintaining green features require constant vigilance, according to another professional(GR22). Previous research studies, however, have shown that green building designs are tiedwith long-term lower operation and maintenance costs (e.g. McGraw-Hill, 2013; Alexia andVenters, 2010). The opposite is true for conventional designs. This shows that “lowmaintenance and operation cost,” as well as “occupant general living satisfaction” should behighly recognized as a green building success criteria.

Usage of sustainable materials (material aspect) was also rated high by the questionnairerespondents, as it leads to lower operating costs. However, it is surprising to note that“water use” has not been ranked as that important by occupants. Green building designsincorporate water consumption as one of the main elements affecting the environment (Xieet al., 2017). On the other hand, “innovative design” and the “level of design difficulty” havebeen considered as of least important. This is understandable because innovative designsare not necessarily environmentally friendly designs (Herring and Roy, 2007).

These findings are consistent with the questionnaire survey respondents’ ranking onthe four main green building success criteria (Table VI). Accordingly, as anticipated,“environmental protection” has been ranked first, with a mean score of 3.276, followed by“living quality” and “cost and profits.” This confirms that environmental concern, i.e. howdo buildings affect the environment is the most important criterion determining whether abuilding is green. This is also largely consistent with the existing literature. Hence, greenbuilding assessment schemes, such as BEAM plus and the LEED, which emphasizeenvironmental performance, are generally good representative models in determininggreen features application success criteria. The finding of this study also implies thatliving quality, as also reflected through “occupant comfort and satisfaction” above, is alsoan equally important feature of green buildings and hence a significant factor thatdetermines the greenness of a building. This aspect has not however been properlyconsidered in the above assessment schemes. Previous work shows that “technicaldifficulty during the design and construction” is considered as one of the important factorin this regard, which is very much in line with the present study findings (e.g. Hasan andZhang, 2016), as seen in Table V. Innovative design and the level of design difficulty wereconsidered the least significant.

4.2 Barriers to adopting green building application in Hong KongUsing the Likert Scale format, respondents were asked to rank barriers in order ofimportance. The results of the RII are summarized in Table VII. The top most threesignificant barriers to adopting green features were found to be “high maintenance andoperation cost,” “high-construction and material cost” and “structural incapacity of existingbuildings.” Nearly 81 percent of the respondents agree or strongly agree that “highmaintenance and operation cost” is the most significant barrier, with a RII of 0.841, inrelation to promoting and implementing green buildings in Hong Kong. This is consistentwith the findings in the previous section, where respondents ranked “future maintenance

264

SASBE7,3/4

and operation cost” as the third most significant criterion defining a green buildingapplications in Hong Kong.

Questionnaire survey results clearly indicate that costs (construction cost as well asmaintenance and operation) is the main barrier inhibiting the application of green buildingtechnologies in Hong Kong. All the professionals in group 2, and one professional in group 1(GR11) also thought that initial design and construction cost was a significant element indetermining green features application. They thought this was especially true for HongKong due to its high costs of construction. This finding is, in fact, in line with some previousstudies (e.g. Tam et al., 2012; Hwang et al., 2015; Bandy et al., 2007). In addition to highconstruction cost, obtaining green certifications for buildings (such as BEAM Plus or LEED)is also not cheap. Thus, developers and even occupants tend to think twice before investingin green buildings. Though researchers and professionals claim that green technologies,such as energy saving systems, lead to long-term (life cycle) lower running costs, users anddevelopers have not been very much convinced because the benefits that green buildingsprovide is over long-term, people hesitate to take decisions, which only bring benefitsbeyond their life time. This has been the major barrier to the provision of green buildings.

The structural incapacity of existing old buildings is the third most significant barrierbased on the respondent response. In addition to the development of new green buildings,the sustainable renovation of existing building is essential in order to achieve the overallgoal of sustainable development. This is especially true because the vast majority of thebuildings in Hong Kong are aged (Wong, 2017). Most of these buildings are not structurallystrong enough to take the loading of additional green features, such as green roofs. Muchinvestment is required to strengthen such structures sufficient to bear the extra loading,which may not be economically sound for developers. In view of the high proportion of aged

Percentage of respondents rankingGeneral criteria 1 2 3 4 Mean rating Rank

Environmental protection 55.172 18.966 24.138 1.724 3.276 1Living quality 10.345 56.897 10.345 22.414 2.569 2Cost and profits 27.586 5.172 56.897 10.345 2.500 3Design and construction 6.897 18.966 8.621 65.517 1.672 4

Table VI.Ranking of generalcriteria to determine

successful greenbuilding features

application

Percentage ofrespondents’ rating

Code Barriers ⩾4 3 ⩽2Relative importance

index Rank

B3 High maintenance and operation cost 81.034 13.793 5.172 0.841 1B2 High construction and material cost 79.310 17.241 3.448 0.828 2B6 Old age and structural incapability of

existing buildings 53.448 31.034 15.517 0.738 3B7 Lack of financial incentives provided

by government 58.621 20.690 20.690 0.714 4B5 Greater construction technology required 51.724 27.586 20.690 0.679 5B1 High design cost 44.828 36.207 18.966 0.676 6B4 Unfamiliar project management 13.793 44.828 41.379 0.545 7B9 Lack of market demand and interest 13.793 25.862 60.345 0.472 8B8 Lack of reliable evidence on green building

benefits 6.897 22.414 70.690 0.441 9

Table VII.Ranking of the major

barriers for inapplication of green

building features

265

GBFs inHong Kong

buildings in Hong Kong, this seems to be a crucial barrier to the large-scale implementationof GBFs. Some previous studies have also echoed this view (e.g. Zhang et al., 2012). In linewith this, professionals in group 2 (GR21, GR22, and GR23) also emphasized, referring to oldresidential buildings, that the main difficulty in the application of green features is themultiple ownership of residential units.

The survey respondents have ranked “Lack of incentives by the government” among thefirst-five barriers. Echoing this view, all three professionals in group 1 (GR11, GR12, andGR13) believe that though the government has already provided some incentives fordevelopers, they are not sufficient to radically change the green property market. Theymentioned that several government initiatives have been implemented over the past decadeto encourage property developers to incorporate more green features, including thestandard environmental performance system (ISO 14001), which was initiated by the HongKong Quality Assurance Agency; IAQ rating scheme, implemented by the EnvironmentalProtection Department; and the Joint Practice Notes 1 ( JPN1) and 2 ( JPN2), jointlyimplemented by the BD, the Lands Department and the PD. GR11 and GR12 specificallymentioned that JPN1 and JPN2 gave special benefits to developers who embrace greenfeatures. However, GR13 emphasized that incentives should be given to buyers to promotegreen building applications in Hong Kong. According to GR12, it is essential to raise theawareness of green buildings among the public, which can only be done by showing thatgreen buildings are easier and cheaper to maintain. Further elaborating, he mentioned, thatno matter what incentives are given to developers, green buildings will not be successfuluntil users are convinced about the benefits. In fact, two professionals from the secondgroup (GR21 GR23) had the same view. This corresponds with the findings of thequestionnaire survey.

Without proper government incentives and support, it is difficult to enhance theawareness of green buildings among the public. As the cost of maintenance and operationand the cost of construction of green features are especially high, owners may see greenfeatures as a burden without a proper government incentive scheme, particularly a financialscheme. That in turn affects the demand for green buildings. The second group howeverhad a different view on government incentives. Except for one professional (GR21), the othertwo emphasized that the government should not interfere with the property market as itmight disturb the market mechanism.

Survey respondents have identified “lack of reliable evidence on green building benefits”as the least significant barrier. This can be interpreted as that people are already aware ofgreen building benefits. Thus, the respondents’ major concern seems to be the highmaintenance, operation and construction costs as well as lack of a proper financial incentivescheme to enhance green features development. This finding is in line with the respondents’ranking of the “overall major barrier sets,” as seen in Table VIII, “cost implication” is rankedas the most significant obstacle to the development of green buildings in Hong Kong. Theprofessional perceptions are largely consistent with questionnaire findings, in whichmaintenance, operation and construction costs were ranked first and second, respectively,as barriers to GBFs implementation. This finding is also in line with previous literature(Tam et al., 2012; Hwang et al., 2015; Bandy et al., 2007).

4.3 Public awareness, incentives and green features applications – professional perceptionIn addition to above findings/opinions, this section summarizes opinions of professionals onincentives to promote green buildings in Hong Kong. All six respondents ( from both groups)highlighted the importance of having an active incentive program among potential buyers.They identified lack of a program of proper awareness by the authorities, especially amongpotential buyers as a main barrier to active implementation of green buildings in Hong Kong.This is especially essential, according to them, because of extraordinarily high-property prices

266

SASBE7,3/4

in Hong Kong. Whilst, all professionals in both groups were of the view that green featuresapplication in Hong Kong is still in the infancy stage, they generally perceived that there is apositive attitude in society toward green buildings and green living. However, they believe thatit is difficult for middle-income and lower income classes even to think of buying flats withgreen features as residential property prices are already very high in Hong Kong. GR11 andGR13 think that it will not be that easy to speed up green features applications in HongKong aslong as residential property market is governed by only a few developers. GR12 mentioned thatthe green buildingmarket will only be available for the rich in society if the residential propertymarket rocketing prices continue. Adding to this, GR11 opined that most newly built luxuryand semi-luxury residential developments do embrace green features, but not the ordinaryhousing developments. The second group also believed and emphasized that an attitudetoward green living is gaining momentum, but the current property market is not favorable torealization of the dream of green living. They commonly believe that there are some positivesigns in public sector projects, mainly because of adequate government funding. However, oneprofessional (GR22) did not entirely agree with this idea. He emphasized that governmentefforts in the provision of housing is not very enthusiastic. GR12, nevertheless, strongly opinedthat Hong Kong will catch up soon with similar cities such as Singapore where green buildingsare being aggressively promoted in their new developments. Overall, the opinions ofprofessionals in-group discussions are broadly in line with the questionnaire survey findings.

4.4 Most suitable green features application in Hong KongIn the questionnaire, respondents were also given an opportunity to express their opinion onthe green features most suitable for wider application in Hong Kong. They were given fouroptions to choose from. More than half of the respondents (55 percent) perceive that thegreen features related to “natural lighting and ventilation” (e.g. advanced glazing) are themost suitable for wider application in Hong Kong. The second most suitable choice is“vegetation and greenery” (e.g. a green roof ). Natural lighting and ventilation is the bestway to reduce consumption of non-renewable energy. Natural ventilation helps to supplyand remove indoor space air without the use of a fan or other mechanical systems. Naturalventilation, if carefully designed, is no doubt the best answer to rising concerns on the costand environmental impact of energy use, can also reduce operational costs and cost ofenergy consumption for air-conditioning and circulation of fans.

The “vegetation and greenery” mainly includes green features, such as a green roof andvertical greening. Vertical green walls and gardens provide numerous economic, environmentaland social benefits including increased habitat areas, reduced GHG emission, improved indoorair quality and adaptation to climate change (Gregoire and Clausen, 2011; Fioretti et al., 2010). Inaddition to these benefits, vegetation and greenery enhance the appearance of the building whileproviding a refreshing feeling for the occupant. Green construction materials however were notconsidered as that significant by the respondents. A possible reason is that the constructionmaterials development industry in Hong Kong is a mature one and there is no room fordevelopment due to high labor and land costs. In fact, almost all materials are imported, mainlyfrom China. Also, material conservation systems are considered to be of greater complexity.

Percentage of respondents’ rankingMajor barrier sets 1 2 3 Mean rating Rank

Cost implication 82.759 17.241 0.000 2.828 1Project feasibility 17.241 31.034 51.724 1.879 2Market condition and trend 0.000 51.724 48.276 1.293 3

Table VIII.Ranking of the overallmajor barrier sets to

green buildingfeatures application

267

GBFs inHong Kong

Following case studies validated and consolidated above findings obtained from thequestionnaire survey with regard to the main GBFs that are popular in Hong Kong. Forexample, the Zero Carbon Building, the first and only one of that sort so far in Hong Kong, inline with survey respondents’ opinions, contains various innovative green features. Thelinear and tapered building design helps to enhance natural lighting and ventilation andminimize heat gain from the sun. The cross-ventilated layout also facilitates ventilation.There are large-scale and innovative advanced green features, such as solar panels and biotri-generators. Another environmentally friendly element is the high-volume-low-speedceiling fans installed to minimize the usage of air-conditioning units. The building alsoincludes energy generating elements such as the photovoltaic panels and a bio tri-generatorabove. In line with questionnaire respondents’ opinion, one of the most important features inZero Carbon Building is the extent of greenery coverage, at up to 50 percent of the site area.This feature enhances the microclimate and mitigates the urban heat island effects. Thisbuilding however was built as an exhibition platform for GBFs to enhance public awarenessof the importance of environmental protection through green features.

The second case, Hysan Place, a mixed-use commercial building with 15 storeys of GradeA offices and 17 storeys of shopping malls, is a good example of green features application.According to the Hong Kong Green Building Council (2016c), Hysan Place has been built tothe highest standards of environmental performance. In line with questionnaire surveyrespondents first choice, the building uses a wide range of high-performance curtain wallsystems. As high-performance curtain walls use low-emissivity double-glazed windowswith solar shading devices, it better utilizes daylight and significantly reduces electricityconsumption for lighting. Meanwhile, the low-emissivity glass panes prevent excessive heatgain while the double-glazing also acts as a noise barrier. Another element consists of theurban windows provided at lower floors. One purpose is to enhance ventilation and improvethe microclimate of the neighborhood. In accordance with the second most popular greenapplication choice by survey respondents, the Hysan Place has adopted wide application ofgreen roofs and vertical greening features to mitigate the heat and lower the surroundingtemperature. The total area of greenery at Hysan Place is about 47 percent of its site area.The rooftop comprises urban farms, a sky garden and vertical greening, which mitigate theurban heat island effect. The rooftop garden and a terrace provide a spacious recreationalspace for occupants, which also enhance the appearance of the building.

The last case study, Kwai Shing West Estate, which is the first already existing buildingto receive a BEAM plus Platinum rating in Hong Kong (Hong Kong Green BuildingCouncil, 2016c). This project is a good demonstration of how conventional buildings can betransformed to green buildings. The building has been upgraded to incorporate a rich rangeof green features, especially demonstrating the best use of natural lighting and ventilation.An important energy saving feature, i.e. energy saving electronic ballast, was installed forthe estate public lighting, which is an Energy Efficiency Labelling Scheme, initiated by theElectrical and Mechanical Services Department. This feature has reduced electricityconsumption by at least 10 percent in all blocks (Hong Kong Green Building Council, 2016a,b, c). Various water saving devices such as sensory water taps, dual flush water cisterns andurinals have been installed including in public toilets and management offices in the estate.This has reduced the wastage of water significantly. This is very much in line with the firstchoice of the survey respondents.

Another drastic change to the estate is the inclusion of green roofs and vertical greening.This is the second most popular green feature, according to survey respondents. Verticalgreening was installed on the low-rise structures in the estate including the pump houses,increasing green ratio of the estate to 27 percent of the total construction floor area of the wholeestate. In addition, energy and carbon audits are used to monitor the environmental performanceof the estate. This facilitates better management of the green features of the building.

268

SASBE7,3/4

These cases highlight the green features, such as advanced glazing, vertical greening andgreen rooftops, which are somewhat popular in Hong Kong. This accords with views of therespondents for the questionnaire survey as well as those in group discussions.

5. Conclusions and recommendationsAn understanding of the criteria, which determines whether a building has a successfulapplication of GBFs or not, and of the barriers opposing the implementation of greenfeatures is essential for promoting and enhancement of green buildings in Hong Kong.This study investigated success criteria and barriers. Findings suggest that, first,enhanced environmental performance (e.g. energy use in the building) is the mostsignificant of success criteria followed by, second, living quality of occupants (e.g. IEQ,and occupants’ satisfaction) and third, “green” costs (e.g. maintenance cost) in determiningthe successful application of green features. This clearly shows that taking onlyenvironmental aspect of a building into account is not sufficient for rating or determiningthe “greenness” of a building. This also clearly illustrates the point that sustainablebuilding development needs to take accounts of economic and social perspectives as wellas environmental perspectives – striking a balance between them.

As for barriers, costs implications (cost of construction, maintenance and operation) arethe main barrier preventing the application of green building technologies in Hong Kong.This is further aggravated by extremely high-property prices in Hong Kong (due to highdevelopment and construction costs) causing lack of demand for green properties. Thus, itmay be difficult for middle-income and lower income classes even to think of buying flatswith green features, as residential property prices are already very high in Hong Kong.Hence, some newly built luxury and semi-luxury residential developments do embracegreen features, but not the ordinary housing developments. In addition, the inability of thecurrent stock of old buildings (structural incapacity) to support the weight of some greenfeatures, and the market situation (e.g. lack of financial incentives) is the other significantbarriers preventing the application of green features in Hong Kong. The age of abuilding has been a significant barrier to the adoption of green features in other places aswell. The necessity for financial and other appropriate incentive schemes was echoed inthis study. Though the government has provided some incentives for developers, but theyare not sufficient to radically change the green property market. However, governmentintervention in the market can be controversial. The lack of a program of properawareness by the authorities, especially among potential buyers is also highlighted.People are also not convinced about the benefits of buying or living in green properties inthe immediate future.

As green building development is still a contemporary subject of discussion, this studywould be beneficial to decision makers as it identifies the criteria determining the success ofgreen building adoption and barriers to implementation of such features. That way,concerned people will have better understanding of the factors affecting the adoption ofGBFs such as cost and energy usage. Cost implication is not only a criterion but also abarrier to successful implementation of GBFs. To salvage this challenge, a policy can bepromulgated to strike a balance between energy consumption and implementation of GBFssuch that cost implication can become bearable in the face of already high-property prices inHong Kong. Furthermore, this study can assist practitioners to find a lasting solution to theidentified barriers in the process of implementing GBFs. This, in turn, should improve thedwindling rate of adoption of green building in Hong Kong. The lists of criteria and barriersidentified in this study make this paper useful for researchers to conduct further studies indifferent geographical locations using a different approach or simply replicate the approachused in this study and compare the results. The findings of this study provide thegovernment and other relevant authorities with insights into how GBFs promotion projects

269

GBFs inHong Kong

should proceed in the future. A package of incentives should be given to buyers to promotegreen building applications in Hong Kong. The findings are relevant to refinement of greenbuilding development policy and may stimulate increased market demand for greenbuildings in the city.

References

Ahn, Y.H., Pearce, A., Wang, G. and Wang, Y. (2013), “Drivers and barriers of sustainable design andconstruction: the perception of green building experience”, International Journal of SustainableBuilding Technology and Urban Development, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 35-45.

Alexia, N. and Venters, V. (2010), “Costs and benefits of building green”, IEEE EngineeringManagement Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 77-87.

Ali, H.H. and Al Nsairat, S.F. (2009), “Developing a green building assessment tool for developingcountries – case of Jordan”, Building and Environment, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 1053-1064.

Alrashed, F. and Asif, M. (2012), “Prospects of renewable energy to promote zero-energy residentialbuildings in the KSA”, Energy Procedia, Vol. 18 No. 2012, pp. 1096-1105, available at: https://goo.gl/eoo8rV

Augenbroe, G.L.M. and Pearce, A.R. (2000), “Sustainable construction in the USA: a perspective to theyear 2010”, Proceedings of the International Conference on World Futures, February 22-25.

Bandy, R., Danckaert, C., Fetscher, G., Holmes, B., Gale, M., Mirsky, M. and Stewart, S. (2007), “Leed inupstate New York: an exploration of barriers, resources and strategies”, USGBC New YorkUpstate Chapter and Environment Finance Center, EPA Region, New York, NY, p. 2.

Banting, D., Doshi, H., Li, J., Missios, P., Au, A., Currie, B.A. and Verrati, M. (2005), “Report on theenvironmental benefits and costs of green roof technology for the City of Toronto”, Report onthe Environmental Benefits and Costs of Green Roof Technology, Toronto, available at: https://goo.gl/SyKLvc

Biswas, T., Wang, T. and Krishnamurti, R. (2009), “Framework for sustainable building design”, PaperNo. 47, School of Architecture.

Bond, S. and Perrett, G. (2012), “The key drivers and barriers to the sustainable development ofcommercial property in New Zealand”, The Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, Vol. 4 No. 1,pp. 48-77, available at: https://goo.gl/mZR8vp

Burnett, J., Chau, C.K., Lee, W.L. and Edmunds, K. (2008), Costs and Financial Benefits of UndertakingGreen Building Assessments, Construction Industry Institute-Hong Kong, Hong Kong.

Carter, T. and Fowler, L. (2008), “Establishing green roof infrastructure through environmental policyinstruments”, Environmental Management, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 151-164.

Chan, A.P., Darko, A., Effah, E.A. and Owusu-Manu, D.-G. (2016), “Barriers affecting the adoption ofgreen building technologies”, Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 33 No 3, pp. 1-38.

Chiang, Y.H., Chan, E.H.W. and Lok, L.K.L. (2005), “Prefabrication and barriers to entry – a casestudy of public housing and institutional buildings in Hong Kong”,Habitat International, Vol. 28No. 3, pp. 1-18.

Dodge Data & Analytics (2016), “World green building trends 2016 smartmarket report”, available at:https://bit.ly/2qiVnVP (accessed April 4, 2018).

Dörnyei, Z. (2007), Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

Eichholtz, P., Kok, N. and Quigley, J.M. (2013), “The economics of green building”, Review of Economicsand Statistics, Vol. 95 No. 1, pp. 50-63.

Faniran, O.O. and Caban, G. (1998), “Minimizing waste on construction project sites”, Engineering,Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 182-188.

Fellows, R.F. and Liu, A.M. (2015), Research Methods for Construction, John Wiley & Sons.

Fioretti, R., Palla, A., Lanza, L.G. and Principi, P. (2010), “Green roof energy and water related performancein the Mediterranean climate”, Building and Environment, Vol. 45 No. 8, pp. 1890-1904.

270

SASBE7,3/4

Furr, J.E. (2009), “Green building and sustainable development: the practical legal guide”, AmericanBar Association.

Geissler, P.W. (2013), “Public secrets in public health: knowing not to know while making scientificknowledge”, American Ethnologist, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 13-34, available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12002

Gottfried, D.A. (1996), Sustainable Building Technical Manual: Green Building Design, Construction, andOperations, Public Technology.

Gou, Z., Lau, S.S.Y. and Prasad, D.K. (2013), “Market readiness and policy implications for greenbuildings: CASE study from Hong Kong”, Journal of Green Building, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 162-173.

Graham, P.M. and Smithers, G. (1996), “Construction waste minimisation for Australian residentialdevelopment”, Asia Pacific Building and Construction Management Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 14-19.

Gregoire, B.G. and Clausen, J.C. (2011), “Effect of a modular extensive green roof on storm water runoffand water quality”, Ecological Engineering, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 963-969.

GRHCC (2003), “Green roofs for healthy cities (GRHCC)”, GRHCC, Toronto, available at: https://goo.gl/6w8Ctq

Gündoğan, H. (2012), “Motivators and barriers for green building construction market in Turkey. ”,master’s theses, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.

Gündüz, M., Nielsen, Y. and Özdemir, M. (2013), “Quantification of delay factors using the relativeimportance index method for construction projects in Turkey”, Journal of Management inEngineering, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 133-139.

Hasan, M.S. and Zhang, R.-J. (2016), “Critical barriers and challenges in implimentation of greenconstruction in China”, International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol. 6No. 2, pp. 435-445, available at: https://goo.gl/drHgqN

Heerwagen, J. (2000), “Green buildings, organizational success and occupant productivity”, BuildingResearch & Information, Vol. 28 Nos 5-6, pp. 353-367.

Herring, H. and Roy, R. (2007), “Technological innovation, energy efficient design and the reboundeffect”, Technovation, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 194-203.

Hill, T. (2017), “Why has Asia been slow to catch on to green buildings?”, Eco-Business, available at:https://bit.ly/2pBvK0f

HKSAR (2011), “Green buildings”, HKSAR, Hong Kong, available at: https://goo.gl/HiKqeG (accessedMarch 24, 2018).

Hong Kong Government (2015), “Policies and measures to promote green buildings”, Hong KongGovernment, Hong Kong, available at: https://bit.ly/2ECHtSN (accessed April 12, 2018).

Hong Kong Green Building Council (2014), “Hysan place”, Hong Kong Green Building Council,Hong Kong, available at: https://goo.gl/erHMHq (accessed March 28, 2018).

Hong Kong Green Building Council (2016a), “BEAM Plus new buildings”, Hong Kong Green BuildingCouncil, Hong Kong, available at: https://goo.gl/FNvNM6 (accessed March 28, 2018).

Hong Kong Green Building Council (2016b), “BEAM plus existing buildings”, Hong Kong GreenBuilding Council, Hong Kong, available at: https://goo.gl/zNuJT5 (accessed March 28, 2018).

Hong Kong Green Building Council (2016c), “Projects – BEAM online exhibition”, Hong Kong GreenBuilding Council, Hong Kong, available at: https://goo.gl/uT4tkE (accessed March 28, 2018).

Hong Kong Green Building Council (2018), “Hong Kong – BEAM Plus”, Hong Kong Green BuildingCouncil, Hong Kong, available at: https://bit.ly/2qochlU (accessed March 28, 2018).

Huang, Y.H. and Wu, J.H. (2007), “Technological system and renewable energy policy: a casestudy of solar photovoltaic in Taiwan”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 11 No. 2,pp. 345-356.

Hwang, B.G. and Tan, J.S. (2012a), “Green building project management: obstacles and solutions forsustainable development”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 335-349.

271

GBFs inHong Kong

Hwang, B.G. and Tan, J.S. (2012b), “Sustainable project management for green construction: challenges,impact and solutions”, in Seratne, S. and Sandanayake, Y.G. (Eds), World ConstructionConference 2012 – Global Challenges in Construction Industry, The Ceylon Institute of Builders,Colombo, pp. 171-179.

Hwang, B.G., Zhao, X. and Tan, L.L.G. (2015), “Green building projects: schedule performance,influential factors and solutions”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management,Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 327-346.

Hwang, B.-G. and Ng, W.J. (2013), “Project management knowledge and skills for green construction:overcoming challenges”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 272-284.

Hydes, K.R. and Creech, L. (2000), “Reducing mechanical equipment cost: the economics of greendesign”, Building Research & Information, Vol. 28 Nos 5-6, pp. 403-407.

Isa, M., Sipan, I., Hwa, T. and Rahman, M.M. (2015), “Rationalising the potential of green office buildinginvestments in Malaysia”, in Hurst, N. (Ed.), 21st Annual Pacific-Rim Real Estate SocietyConference, Emerald Property Journals, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 1-18.

Iwaro, J. and Mwasha, A. (2010), “A review of building energy regulation and policy for energyconservation in developing countries”, Energy Policy, Vol. 38 No. 12, pp. 7744-7755.

Jason, D. (2009), “Incentives and barriers impacting the implementation of green building exteriors”,University of New SouthWales, Sydney, available at: https://goo.gl/UkGu6w (accessed April 6, 2018).

Kats, G.H. (2003), Green Building Costs and Financial Benefits, Massachusetts TechnologyCollaborative, Westborough, MA.

Kwong, B. (2004), “Quantifying the benefits of sustainable buildings”, AACE InternationalTransactions, pp. RI101-RI106.

Latief, Y., Berawi, M.A., Basten, V. and Budiman, R. (2017), “Premium cost optimization of operationaland maintenance of green building in Indonesia using life cycle assessment method”, AIPConference Proceedings, Surakarta, December 7–8, 2016.

Lippaiová, R. and Sebestyén, Z. (2013), “Green construction project management”, Miskolci EgyetemInnovációs és Technológia Transzfer Centrum, available at, available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10890/4977

Liu, K.Y. and Baskaran, A. (2005), “Using garden roof systems to achieve sustainable buildingenvelopes”, Construction Technology Update No. 65, Institute for Research in Construction,National Research Council of Canada, available at: https://goo.gl/bTG6sd (accessed April 6, 2018).

McDonald, B. (1998), “Implementing a waste management plan during the construction phase of a project:a case study”, Journal of Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 71-78.

McGraw-Hill Construction (2006), “Green building smartmarket report”, available at: https://bit.ly/2HfN8nc (accessed April 14, 2018).

McGraw-Hill Construction (2013), “World green building trends”, Smart Market Report,McGraw-Hill Construction, Bedford.

Malhotra, N.K. (1993), Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, Prentice Hall, New York, NY.

Mansour, O.E. and Radford, S.K. (2014), “Green building perception matrix: a theoretical framework”,The Annual Architectural Research Symposium in Finland, Research group: Urban Planning,Oulu, pp. 40-52.

Mayor, P. (2008), “Whole life costing: green roofs”, available at: https://bit.ly/2JBS4RJ (accessedApril 14, 2018).

Miller, N., Spivey, J. and Florance, A. (2008), “Does green pay off?”, Journal of Real Estate PortfolioManagement, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 385-400.

Morri, G. and Soffietti, F. (2013), “Greenbuilding sustainability and market premiums in Italy”, Journalof European Real Estate Research, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 303-332.

Mosly, I. (2015), “Barriers to the diffusion and adoption of green buildings in Saudi Arabia”,Management and Sustainability, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 104-114, available at: https://goo.gl/Ms3D3s

272

SASBE7,3/4

Nduka, D.O. and Ogunsanmi, O.E. (2015), “Stakeholders perception of factors determining theadoptability of green building practices in construction projects In Nigeria”, Environment andEarth Science, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 188-196, available at: https://goo.gl/PcpA4C

Oberndorfer, E., Lundholm, J., Bass, B., Coffman, R., Doshi, H., Dunnett, N., Gaffin, S., Kohler, M., Liu, K.and Rowe, B. (2007), “Green roofs as urban ecosystems: ecological structures, functions andservices”, BioScience, Vol. 57 No. 10, pp. 823-833.

Poon, C.S. (1997), “Management and recycling of demolition waste in Hong Kong”,Waste Management& Research, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 561-572.

Poon, C.S. (2000), “Management and recycling of Demolition waste in Hong Kong”, Proceedings 2ndInternational Conference on Solid Waste Management, Athens, June 12–14.

Poon, C.S., Yu, T.W. and Ng, L.H. (2001), A Guide for Managing and Minimizing Building andDemolition Waste, Department of Civil & Structural Engineering, Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity, Hong Kong.

Qian, Q.K., Chan, E.H. and Khalid, A.G. (2015), “Challenges in delivering green building projects:unearthing the transaction costs (TCs)”, Sustainability, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 3615-3636.

Ries, R., Bilec, M.M., Gokhan, N.M. and Needy, K.L. (2006), “The economic benefits of green buildings: acomprehensive case study”, The Engineering Economist, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 259-295.

Roychowdhury, D., Murthy, R. and Jose, P. (2015), Facilitating Green Building Adoption – AnOptimization Based Decision Support Tool, IIM Bangalore, Bangalore.

Sabini, L. (2016), “Brief for GSDR – 2016 Update: project management and sustainability”, available at:https://goo.gl/H2e3q1 (accessed April 14, 2018).

Samari, M., Ghodrati, N., Esmaeilifar, R., Olfat, P. and Shafiei, M.W.M. (2013), “The investigation of thebarriers in developing green building in Malaysia”, Modern Applied Science, Vol. 7 No. 2, p. 1,available at: https://goo.gl/Uopiub

Santos, J.R.A. (1999), “Cronbach’s Alpha: a tool for assessing the reliability of scales”, Journal ofExtension, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 1-5.

Shen, L.Y., Tam, V.W.Y. and Li, C.Y. (2009), “Benefit analysis on replacing in situ concreting withprecast slabs for temporary construction works in pursuing sustainable construction practice”,Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 145-148.

Shen, L. and Tam, V.W. (2002), “Implementation of environmental management in theHong Kong construction industry”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 20No. 7, pp. 535-543.

Sobek, W., Sedlbauer, K. and Schuster, H. (2009), “Sustainable building”, in Bullinger, H.J. (Ed.),Technology Guide, Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg.

Tam, V.W., Hao, J.L. and Zeng, S.X. (2012), “What affects implementation of green buildings?An empirical study in Hong Kong”, International Journal of Strategic Property Management,Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 115-125.

Turner Construction Company (2005), “Green building market Barometer”, available at: https://bit.ly/1tzJneA (accessed April 14, 2018).

Tzschentke, N., Kirk, D. and Lynch, P.A. (2004), “Reasons for going green in serviced accommodationestablishments”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 16 No. 2,pp. 116-124.

UNEP (2003), “Sustainable building and construction: facts and figures”, UNEP Industry andEnvironment, Vol. 26 Nos 2–3, pp. 5-8.

Usman, N. and Gidado, U.M. (2015), “An assessment of the factors affecting green building technology(GBT) adoption”, Jeddah Saudi Arabia, Vol. 13 No. 1, available at: www.researchgate.net/publication/323878642 (accessed January 1, 2018).

Wadu Mesthrige, J. and Wan, S.M. (2013), “Effect of green labelling on residential property price: a casestudy in Hong Kong”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 31-51.

273

GBFs inHong Kong

Windapo, A.O. (2014), “Examination of green building drivers in the South African constructionindustry: economics versus ecology”, Sustainability, Vol. 6 No. 9, pp. 6088-6106.

Wong, R. (2017), “Hong Kong’s rising number of aged buildings need facelifts”, SCMP, August 1,available at: https://bit.ly/2GPVz98 (accessed April 12, 2018).

World Green Building Council (2013), “The business case of green building: a review of the costs,benefits for developers, investors and occupants”, available at: https://goo.gl/39DShm

Xie, X., Yi, L. and Gou, Z. (2017), “Green building pro-environment behaviors: are green users also greenbuyers?”, Sustainability, Vol. 9 No. 10, pp. 1-13.

Yates, A. (2001), Quantifying the Business Benefits of Sustainable Buildings – Summary of ExistingResearch finds (Extract) (Draft for Discussion), BRE Centre for Sustainable Construction,London.

Zhang, X., Platten, A. and Shen, L. (2011), “Green property development practice in China: costs andBarriers”, Building and Environment, Vol. 46 No. 11, pp. 2153-2160.

Zhang, X., Shen, L. and Wu, Y. (2011), “Green strategy for gaining competitive advantage in housingdevelopment: a China study”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 19 Nos 2-3, pp. 157-167.

Zhang, X., Shen, L., Tam, V.W. and Lee, W.W.Y. (2012), “Barriers to implement extensivegreen roof systems: a Hong Kong study”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 16No. 1, pp. 314-319.

Zhang, Y. and Wang, Y. (2013), “Barriers’ and Policies’ analysis of China’s building energy efficiency”,Energy Policy, Vol. 62 No. 2013, pp. 768-773, available at: https://goo.gl/3EabeV

Zou, P.X.W., Sunindijo, R.Y. and Dainty, A.R.J. (2014), “A mixed methods research design forbridging the gap between research and practice in construction safety”, Safety Science, Vol. 70,December, pp. 316-326.

274

SASBE7,3/4

Appendix. Sample of questionnaire survey

275

GBFs inHong Kong

Corresponding authorJayantha Wadu Mesthrige can be contacted at: [email protected]


276

SASBE7,3/4

Tax increment financing in theUK and USA: its prospects forurban regeneration in NigeriaAlirat Olayinka Agboola and Timothy Oluwafemi Ayodele

Department of Estate Management, Obafemi Awolowo University,Ile-Ife, Nigeria, andAderemi Olofa

The Polytechnic, Ibadan, Nigeria

AbstractPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the potential of tax increment financing (TIF) as a viablefinancial mechanism for urban regeneration programmes in Nigeria. This is with a view to engendering asustainable, productive and competitive urban land market towards enhancing the economic development ofthe country.Design/methodology/approach – This paper adopts a desk-based study approach and review ofsecondary literature on urban regeneration and TIF to examine the usefulness of TIF for funding localinfrastructure development. It then examines the key requirements for the successful application of TIF as afinancial instrument for urban regeneration in an emergent economy like Nigeria.Findings – A number of key requirements for a successful TIF programme particularly in the context of anemergent economy are identified. These are: a functional urban land market with well-developed anddocumented market indices on performance measurement to serve as reliable benchmarks for investors;an established land use planning system consisting of clear rules and effective decision-making processes; anactive capital market that is accessible to institutional and private developers; a viable tax administrationsystem and most importantly an efficient institutional framework with clearly defined formal property rightsand sound enforcement mechanisms to monitor contractual agreements and to police deviations.Originality/value – This paper represents a pioneering attempt at examining the prospects of theapplication of TIF to urban regeneration in the specific context of an emergent Sub-Saharan African country.Keywords Nigeria, Sub-Saharan Africa, Urban renewal, Urban regeneration, Property tax,Tax increment financingPaper type Research paper

1. IntroductionUrban regeneration according to Adair et al. (2003) can be considered as a process that seeksto reverse decay, raise value and kick-start markets to counter the perception of marketfailure that characterises renewal locations. Roberts (2005) further defines urbanregeneration as a comprehensive and integrated vision and action which leads to theresolution of urban problems and which seeks to bring about a lasting improvement in theeconomic, social, physical and environmental condition of an area that has been subject tochange. This change, often degenerative, reflects the complex and dynamic nature of urbanareas as they serve as receptors and generators of environmental and economic transition,thus, reflecting the outcomes of the interplay of the many sources of influence over them.

Urban regeneration efforts in developed economies can be traced back to a distance of upto six decades. Regeneration of major areas of inner cities and towns has been a policyobjective of successive UK governments over several decades (Adair et al., 2007).Neighbourhood regeneration efforts in Europe, Western Europe specifically, do not onlyimprove the quality of housing and the built environment, but also include strategies whichaim for a social transformation (Van Gent, 2010). Kauko (2012) points out that urbanregeneration exercises were aimed at correcting the poor industrial competitiveness anddysfunctional social structures of British cities. This followed the first urban regeneration


Vol. 7 No. 3/4, 2018pp. 277-292


DOI 10.1108/SASBE-03-2018-0018

Received 29 March 2018Revised 3 July 2018

Accepted 17 August 2018


277

Tax incrementfinancing inthe UK and

USA


policy initiatives by the Labour Government in the late 1960s, representing the earliesturban regeneration experience in Europe. Prior to this time British government policies didnot directly address urban decay but were more pre-occupied with regional programmes ofgrants and expenditures to depressed areas to correct the patterns of inequalities anduneven development of the national economy ( Jonas and Ward, 2002). A further impetus foraddressing urban problems in the UK was the promulgation of the 1980 Local Government,Planning and Land Act by the Thatcher Administration. This Act gave support to thecreation of Urban Development Corporations, a form of public–private partnership (PPP)with particular focus on private sector development and improved central state control overlocal government policy making (Imrie and Thomas, 1999). According to Hall and Hickman(2002), the UK Government’s approach to urban regeneration changed in the early 1990stowards community interest or area-specific approach and competitive bidding for fundinglocal regeneration projects through the creation of the Single Regeneration Budget (SRB)(see also Adair et al., 2000). The SRB, a programme that incorporated 20 sources of fundingfrom five different government departments into coordinated efforts that were believed tobe tailored towards local circumstances, allocated funding on a competitive basis based onproposals submitted by local partnerships.

In the USA, some of the earliest regeneration efforts and policies are documented byCarmon (1999) who chronicles the urban regeneration efforts of the UK, the USA and Israelover three generations of policies based on reference to differences in the time horizons anddifferences in the main actors creating the policies. According to the author, in the USA, theearliest regeneration exercise is either attributable to the Housing Law of 1937 or thelegislation of 1949 which was the first to recognise public responsibility for the settlement ofall families in decent and affordable housing. Carmon (1999) observes that a notable urbanregeneration effort in the history of the USA in the mid-1960s, tailored towards acomprehensive approach to tackling the problems of poverty in the distressed areas of largecities of the country, is evidenced in the Model Cities programme under the management ofthe then newly created Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Another important development of the urban regeneration efforts of both the UK and theUSA Governments since the 1980s and early 1990s is the implementation of thedevelopments of flagship projects or specifically prestige projects as a prominent feature ofurban regeneration. For Doucet (2007), large-scale flagship or prestige urban regenerationprojects have been a favoured instrument of economic growth for more than two decades assuch projects are intended to act as catalyst in urban regeneration through the creation ofhigh-profile and high-end retail, residential, entertainment and tourist places in what wereonce neglected or under-used urban spaces.

Loftman and Nevin (1995) observed that numerous urban development corporations andincreasingly local authorities, in charge of large cities such as Birmingham, Manchester andSheffield in the UK have utilised such developments as an integral tool of local economicdevelopment and as a means of securing the physical regeneration of declining urban areas.Spirou and Loftman (2004) gave a good account of the many prestige projects in the city ofBirmingham, UK, and Chicago in the USA, and their effects on the socio-economicdevelopment of those cities. Similarly, other authors have identified prestige projects aseffective mechanisms for achieving physical transformation of declining or previouslyderelict parts of many cities in the USA as confirmed by the magnificent transformation ofcities such as Baltimore and Boston (see Hambleton, 1991; Dutton, 1991). However, someauthors have argued that flagship or prestige projects as a means for urban regenerationhave led to a shift in emphasis from a concern for the provision of services for city residentsand their welfare to a pre-occupation with the prosperity of the city through the provision ofnew harbours for investment which fail to engender a socially equitable regenerationprocess (Hambleton, 1991, 1993; Doucet, 2007).

278

SASBE7,3/4

Nevertheless, it is no gainsay that the maintenance and improvement of the social,physical and economic strength of towns and cities is crucial to the competitive performanceof any economy as a whole. Urban regeneration is a versatile means of improving the socio-economic status of a community and the well-being of its inhabitants. However, thestraitened economic situation that typifies both the UK and the USA and by all means manyparts of the world in the age of the global financial crisis has seen a radical change in urbanpolicies to reduce the burden of direct investment on the state required by urbanregeneration activity (see Parkinson et al., 2009; Gibb and O’Sullivan, 2010; Squires andHutchison, 2014). For instance, in the UK, Squires and Lord (2012) observe that following theglobal financial crisis, successive governments have employed both neo-Keynesian methodsand programme of austerity in public spending to tackle the crisis. These, they submit, haveled in turn to a corresponding reduction in funding for urban regeneration whilstgovernment institutions previously set up for such purposes have been disbanded.Similarly, Haran et al. (2011) argue that sequel to the global financial crisis, private sectorinvestment in regeneration schemes were curtailed by the increased aversion for risk as wellas the increased sentiments for prime investment opportunities by institutional investors.

These have impelled the drive to explore alternative means or vehicles for funding urbanregeneration. Man (1999) provides empirical evidence to support the idea that factors suchas fiscal pressures, tax competition, economic distress, industrial composition, accessibilityof alternative financing measures and the expected increment in property values from theuse of tax increment financing (TIF) positively influence a city’s willingness to adopt a TIFprogramme. In this context, TIF has received significant attention as an alternative meansof financing urban regeneration especially in the UK and the USA to foster the continuationof efforts at stimulating growth and repositioning cities as the mainstays of economicdevelopment, whilst the sizeable volume of scholarly works on TIF in recent times is anattestation to this. Against this background, this paper seeks to contribute to the emergentbody of literature on TIF. In particular, it examines TIF as a potential urban regenerationmechanism to facilitate investments in major cities in Nigeria. While we note the usefulnessof an illustrative case study project/intervention approach to the paper, a desk-basedapproach is adopted essentially to flag up the potentials of TIF for urban regeneration andinfrastructure development in the context of an emergent African economy where relativelylittle is known about this important value capture financing mechanism. We hope this willset the scene for further research on practical application of TIF to regeneration case studyprojects and also influence urban policy directions.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 is a more extensivetheoretical overview of urban regeneration and related concepts. It further provides adescription of the concept of TIF as an urban regeneration measure. Section 3 provides ageneral overview of the tax structure of the Nigerian economy coupled with a considerationof the essential requirements for the successful application of TIF to urban regeneration inthe country. Finally, Section 4 draws some conclusions for the paper.

2. Urban regeneration and TIF as a financing mechanismUrban regeneration as Roberts (2005) notes is the aftermath of the interaction betweenseveral processes that drive the physical, social, environmental and economic transition ofurban areas. Urban regeneration is predicated on the notion that changes in the physicalenvironment translate into economic prosperity and social benefits. It encompasses theimprovements of the urban environment and/or projects therein, the restructuring of theeconomic activity and the reconstruction of the social frameworks (Booth, 2005).

Urban regeneration is hinged on the concept of partnerships as it is often characterisedby market-led initiative influenced by the private sector and which has evolved fromstate provision to private-sector-led involvement (Roberts and Sykes, 2005). Thus, it is a

279


USA

multi-sectoral activity involving public and private sectors, the local community and alsovoluntary institutions working together to achieve a single aim. However, the partnership isnot solely about employing private capital in financing public projects, but involves a widerange of participants, partnering together to achieve economic viability and socialdevelopment (Booth, 2005). Thus, Carter (2005) and Roberts and Sykes (2005) argue thatlack of adequate partnership arrangement, strategy, sustainability and spatial focusundermines the success of urban regeneration efforts. In this vein, Roberts (2005) arguesthat there is a spatial dimension to urban regeneration and points out the spatial continuumof urban regeneration efforts in the UK over a period of five decades to include emphasis onlocal or site levels, regional-level focus, strategic perspective and sometimes a combinationof approaches.

Furthermore, urban regeneration differs from other forms of government intervention inthe urban space. Roberts and Sykes (2005) note some distinguishing features that form thehallmark of urban regeneration. This includes: involvement of strategic activities; a focus onthe totality of the urban space; a search for both long- and short-term solutions; the adoptionof an interventionist approach; emphasis on partnerships; prioritising of agenda; benefit to arange of organisations, agencies and communities; support from various sources of skillsand finance; capable of being measured, evaluated and reviewed; and a link to other urbanpolicy and programmes.

Tallon (2010) identified four main domains or approaches to urban regeneration andnoted that the approaches adopted often impact on the success of the urban regenerationscheme. These are the economic, the sociocultural, the physical/environment and thegovernment/policy dimensions. Healey (1995) also identified two strategies in urbanregeneration – property-led urban regeneration and urban regeneration through peripheralrestraints. However, a demerit of this categorisation as Turok (1992) argued is the simplisticbasis of the notions of the nature of contemporary city economics and of the relationbetween property development and economic development. Roberts and Sykes (2005)further identified two approaches to urban regeneration – the mini area approach and thebroad-based policies. However, the authors noted that adopting either of these individuallyhas its own demerit. That is, while the local initiatives or mini approach alone are unlikely tosufficiently mitigate major urban challenges, the broad-based approach may not provide theneeded policy for implementation at the local level.

As with other government interventionist schemes in urban space, there are a number ofchallenges associated with urban regeneration. According to Roberts and Sykes (2005),absence of adequate or holistic definition of what constitutes urban regeneration, lack ofclear position regarding the role, structure and operation of urban regeneration policies, lackof commitment to long-term action and exclusion of key groups from partnershiparrangements amongst others are some of the key challenges of urban regeneration. Yet, afundamental challenge to urban regeneration is the issue of finance particularly in the wakeof the global financial crisis and associated credit crunch in many economies. The hugedeficit between capital typically required in funding urban regeneration programmes and itsavailability underscores the need to exploit various forms of financial instruments such asTIF for urban regeneration schemes.

TIF owes its conceptual origins to the USA, specifically in California in 1952 (RICS, 2012;Squires and Hutchison, 2014). In simple terms, TIF allows a local authority to tradeanticipated future tax revenue for a present benefit (Squires and Lord, 2012). It is founded onthe assumption that properties within the designated TIF area will appreciate in value andgenerate sufficient increment tax revenue to fund the infrastructure improvements, ofteninitially supported by a bond issue (Squires and Hutchison, 2014). Hence, TIF is a fiscalmeasure which cities or local governments adopt to eliminate blight and rehabilitate derelictareas by stimulating developments that would otherwise not take place (Huddleston, 1982;

280

SASBE7,3/4

Carroll, 2008). Thus, Jolin et al. (1998) submit that TIF is one of the most powerful toolsthat municipal governments may adopt for fostering and facilitating market-drivenurban regeneration.

Many cities are in dire need of investments in housing and infrastructure to remain clean,secure and competitive. Urban regeneration schemes are embarked upon by governments totransform cities into a more conducive and habitable environment. The need for urbanregeneration arises as a result of decline in the physical, social and environmental structuresof urban areas. Urban regeneration could thus be seen as a process that aims at reversingthe downward trend in property values and ensuring a vibrant and competitive propertymarket within the target jurisdiction. However, financing such huge capital intensiveprojects remains a source of concern to most governments and relevant stakeholders. It isestimated that about $50 trillion will be required for investment in infrastructuraldevelopment across major cities and urban centres of the world by 2022 (OECD, 2007).Given the current economic outlook, many governments especially in emerging economiesmay not be able to meet up with their financial obligations with respect to infrastructuraldevelopments in these cities (NCE, 2014). This shortfall in infrastructure financing is morepronounced given that deficit in investment for infrastructure globally is projected to beabout $1 trillion annually (Boston Consulting Group, 2013). This shortfall in financing urbanregeneration schemes often compels urban dwellers to live in informal settlements devoid ofbasic infrastructural facilities with quality of life being adversely affected.

As pointed out earlier, the wide gap between capital requirements and availability offinance highlights the importance of seeking out various forms of financial instruments tofund urban renewal programmes. These range from tax income, to commercial revenues, toadministrative revenues, PPPs, development charges, land value capture, municipal bonds,public debts or loans, international funding and TIF among others. For instance, McGrealet al. (2002) note the UK governments have employed a broader approach to the use of fiscalincentives for encouraging economic, physical and social development. That is, theprovision of tax relief to stimulate greater involvement by key market players and the use oftax disincentives to discourage property development in prime areas and relocation into theinner urban communities. However, extant literature (see Carroll, 2008; Squires, 2012)suggest that there has been an increasing interest in the use of fiscal incentives such as theTIF, to stimulate urban renewal programmes. This invariably translates into the adoption ofTIF as a fiscal instrument to finance urban renewal programmes and to shore upgovernment revenues from the targeted areas.

Thus, in a bid to stimulate local economic development, TIF as a value capture strategyhas emerged as an increasingly popular financial strategy tool (Carroll, 2008). Emergence ofTIF dates back to 1949 under the Federal Housing Act in the USA. However, it beganeffectively in California in 1952 as a means of raising local funds required for federal urbanrenewal programme (Carlson, 1992; RICS, 2012). TIF is regarded as an importantself-financing fiscal instrument used by the government as a means of generating funds topay for public investment, improvements and economic developments needed to stimulateeconomic development in targeted areas (Smith, 2006). The TIF programme was initiallydesigned to support urban renewal programme with an emphasis on blighted urban areas.However, over the years, TIF has been increasingly adopted in areas that are not blighted(Briffault, 2010).

Thus, TIF could be regarded as a local economic development approach that fundsdevelopment from property tax revenue generated from increases in property values inareas designated as TIF areas. Investment through TIF in a geographic area is done by thegovernment with the aim of stimulating economic growth in the area/zone in whichdevelopment would ordinarily not have occurred given the huge financial commitmentrequired by the government to fund such investments. When an area is designated for

281


USA

redevelopment, the existing property values are held constant as original assessed values,that is, property values prior to the development serve as the baseline tax. It is this baselinetax that is allocated to taxing bodies with jurisdiction over properties in the TIF district overthe lifetime of the TIF district (Weber et al., 2007).

Increases in property values and assessment as a result of the growth in the assessedproperty value due to the new developments or redevelopment in the targeted area will formthe basis of the current assessed value. The difference between the current and originalassessed value of properties in the TIF zone is defined as the captured assessed value. Thisdifference is known as the “incremental” property tax which is reinvested in the area. Thus,it is the current assessed value that is retained and used by the taxing authority to financethe development cost or repay loans used for the development (Klemanski, 1989; Smith,2006; Squires, 2012). The TIF often runs for a number of years, usually 20-plus years, andexpires when the cost of physical developments and other expenses incurred to stimulateeconomic growth within the targeted district is repaid (Weber et al., 2003; Briffault, 2010).When the TIF district expires, taxes on the increment revert to the original taxingauthorities with jurisdictions over the districts (Weber et al., 2007).

TIF has been employed in financing a number of urban regeneration projects, especiallyin developed economies. A major case for the adoption of TIF as a financing option is that itreduces the financial burden on the central authority, that is, the government, and spreads iton the beneficiaries – the citizens, in form of increment tax. The TIF option is often morepractical as the tax payer is motivated by the physical development/redevelopment which isbeing put in place before tax is demanded (Dye and Merriman, 2000; Gibson, 2003; Smith,2006). Furthermore, by adopting TIF as a financing scheme, local governments have theadvantage of supporting comprehensive redevelopment plans in the locality much earlier inthe project-development process (Leavitt et al., 2008). As Weber et al. (2007) point out, TIFallows municipalities to designate an area for improvement and then allocate the increase inproperty tax revenues resulting from property value appreciation to finance economicdevelopment within such districts.

TIF is usually most successful when it is applied to areas of the city that have a highpotential for rapid increases in the incremental value of land. For instance, Weber et al.(2003) note that TIF districts may affect the value of properties that are in close proximitydue to the removal of blight and the presence of incentives for urban and economicdevelopment. Thus, the elimination of blight and financing of infrastructural developmentwithin areas earmarked as TIF areas often improve the quality of life of households inadjoining areas. It may also impact significantly on residential land values because ofincreased willingness to pay for conveniences offered by the redeveloped area. TIF is thus aviable tool for revitalizing declining neighbourhoods and expanding developments to areasof the city that are vacant.

However, despite the widespread adoption TIF has enjoyed in financing urbanregeneration schemes, there are arguments against its adoption as a viable financing tool forurban regeneration. Brueckner (2001) argues that TIF may not always generate sufficientadditional revenue to meet the purpose for which it was intended. Weber et al. (2007) furthernote that TIF has been criticised for causing accelerated increase in targetedneighbourhoods while physical developments spurred by TIF may have significantspillovers either positive or negative, on nearby residential properties. On this note, theauthors point out that an attendant consequence of proximity to industrial TIF districts is adecrease in the rate of appreciation of nearby properties. That is, if a TIF district promotesincompatible land uses or increases noise or other forms of pollution, it could impactnegatively on the value of nearby properties. On the other hand, as Weber et al. (2007) argue,the positive effects of TIF on capital value appreciation in particular TIF districts may havenegative consequences on adjoining low-income residential neighbourhoods in terms of

282

SASBE7,3/4

rapid annual rent increases and potential displacements of residents. Youngman (2011)further notes the issue of misapplication of TIF revenue by cash-strapped local authorities,considering that a portion of the general tax base is frozen for an extended period of time. Inline with this, Lefcoe (2011) points out that many taxing authorities conceal information orfail to obtain information that would show whether actual property tax yields matchedestimated yields forecast at the inception of the project.

One other shortcoming of TIF relates to the issue of displacement of lower income andminority groups. For instance, Immergluck (2009) examined the gentrifying impacts of amajor state-led TIF-funded development initiative in the USA and found that there werelarger increases in premiums for homes near the lower income neighbourhoods. Otherauthors have also examined and documented how spatially focused state-led redevelopmentprojects have prompted and promoted systematic displacement and gentrification of lowerincome and minority groups (see Hackworth and Smith, 2001; Hackworth, 2002; Davidsonand Lees, 2005).

3. Application of TIF to urban regeneration in NigeriaProperty tax has always been a dependable and potential revenue stream for localinfrastructure development and Nigeria is by no means an exception. Thus, tax policies,legislation and administration in Nigeria as well as other countries are primarily structuredas a means of revenue generation. The Nigeria tax administration is based on a three-tieredstructure comprising the federal, state and local governments. However, while these threelevels of government have different fiscal responsibilities, tax administration in Nigeria isheavily geared towards the federal government as it controls viable tax components of thesystem while less profitable taxes are administered by the state and local governments(Odusola, 2006). Also, in most instances, the federal government has sole legislative powerson tax issues while administrative powers are shared with the state governments.According to the National Tax Policy (2012), the objectives of the Nigeria tax system are to:promote fiscal responsibility and accountability; facilitate economic growth anddevelopment; provide the government with stable resources for the provision of publicgoods and services; address inequalities of income distribution; provide economicstabilisation; pursue fairness and equity; and correct market failures and imperfections.

The history of taxation in Nigeria dates back to the advent of the British colonialgovernment in 1861. Organised tax administration in Nigeria began with the introduction ofthe personal income tax in 1904. The personal income tax was subsequently enacted as theDirect Taxation Ordinance No. 4 of 1940. This colonial tax structure forms the basis onwhich the current tax system in Nigeria has evolved. Thus, pre-independence tax policies,legislations and administration were primarily based on the British tax laws and these stillhave some measure of influence on existing tax laws (Leyira et al., 2012).

Post-independence, the Nigerian tax system has largely been dependent on oil revenues(Leyira et al., 2012). The oil boom of 1973/1974 fiscal year led to over reliance on oil revenues tothe neglect of other viable sources of revenue. Hence, tax incomes accruable from other non-oilsources have not been adequately captured in government fiscal policies. Odusola (2006) arguesthat this oil revenue based tax structure has made the Nigerian economy prone to fluctuationsin the international oil market. However, given the recent decline in oil receipts and the need toprotect the economy against crude oil volatilities, there has been an increasing focus on boostingand/or diversifying government revenues, especially through the non-oil sector of the economy.This is with a view to ensuring that government fiscal projections are met at all levels ofgovernment. This is particularly expedient given the current economic recession the country isexperiencing[1]. There is therefore a need for the government to explore other potential meansof generating revenue to meet its infrastructural provision goal and to create an enablingenvironment for investment, development and urban competitiveness.

283


USA

TIF is a property-based tax and a useful financial instrument that municipalgovernments employ for eliminating blight and funding local infrastructure developments.However, despite its growing importance and popularity, TIF as a source of funding urbanrenewal programmes has not been given commensurate attention both in practice andliterature in most developing economies in Africa and particularly in Nigeria. This isperhaps a result of the likely difficulty of implementing a successful TIF programme giventhe limited capital base and the informal structure of many urban cities in most parts ofdeveloping and transition economies. For instance, Brown-Luthango (2011) notes the hugeburden on local governments in South Africa as they are confronted with capacityconstraints and difficulties in raising adequate revenue for financing infrastructure projects.

Nonetheless, TIF is particularly relevant in the Nigerian context considering theprecipitous decline in public fund required for urban development/redevelopmentprogrammes, a consequence of the present economic reality of the country. Furthermore,as Alm (2015) notes, as a property tax, three distinctive advantages of TIF are its relativelylong-term and stable income source, its potential to enable some degree of local control onthe revenue and its ability to direct taxpayers’ attention to the social benefits and costs ofprovision of local public goods and service. Hence, there is a need to examine the potential ofTIF as a viable source of revenue for urban regeneration in Nigeria.

For an urban-property-based finance scheme like TIF to be successful, there has tobe an established land use planning system, consisting of clear rules and effectivedecision-making processes. As Adams and Watkins (2014) point out, planning helps tocreate the kinds of places where people want to live, work, relax and invest by helping citiesto function better economically as well as socially and environmentally. They note that citiesthat are poorly planned, where negative externalities such as congestion, overcrowding orpollution hinder long-term investment value, can create significant costs for society andindividuals. Thus, for a successful TIF programme, there must be an effective mechanism inplace for the deployment of various policy instruments intended to shape, regulate andstimulate the behaviour of market actors, that is, public as well as private sector, in order tobuild their capacity to achieve this.

Also, there must be a functional land and property market in place with well-developedand documented market indices on performance measurement to serve as reliablebenchmarks for investors. In this context, Adlington et al. (2000) argue that the function ofthe real estate market in allocating and reallocating land resources is perhaps its mostimportant contribution to economic prosperity in developed market economies. For instance,Lee and Stevenson (2005) observe that the reasons for the increasing focus of investment inLondon by UK and overseas investors is because there is more information on the real estatemarket of London as London is the most researched region in the UK and Europe. Thus, fora successful TIF programme, the availability of a suitable benchmark to represent thereturns that could reasonably have been expected from equivalent investment decisions isvery crucial (Lee et al., 2000).

These characteristics are the hallmarks of a mature and transparent real estate market.Market transparency is a general prerequisite for successful investment in real estate asonly transparent markets can create confidence and be attractive to professional investors(Schulte et al., 2005). Also, Keogh and D’Arcy (1994) contend that data transparency, marketinformation and presence of non-domestic actors and funds are some of the criteria thatcharacterize a mature market. Similarly, Gordon (1999) submits that the presence ofinvestment performance indices, quality market fundamental research and availability ofreliable financial statement are the standards of a transparent real estate market.

The existence of an active and functional capital market is also an essentialprerequisite for a successful TIF programme. The increasing internationalisation of realestate capital flows presupposes that financial instruments such as TIF to fund urban

284

SASBE7,3/4

regeneration programmes do not necessarily have to be obtained locally. However, it isessential that the local capital market is well developed and sophisticated enough tofacilitate and absorb such international investment capital for a successful TIFprogramme. The objective of TIF as an option for infrastructure financing is to raisefinance through private equity or debt in order to reduce the financial burden on publicauthorities. Given that these debts are paid off from taxes accruable from the increment invalue of the new developments (Carlson, 1992), it is important that institutional andprivate developers have access to private sector finance. For instance, Baum and Murray(2010) in their study of barriers to real estate investments in emerging economies note thatthe implication of the absence of well-developed investment funds and shortage of bankdebts in emerging markets is the poor representation of international equity players andlack of takeout financing in such markets. That is, secondary investors will buy suchinvestments when the original investor sells. This situation, they observed, is a crucialfactor for liquidity in emerging markets as many investors particularly opportunity fundswho seek to buy and sell in a short space of time in order to maximise their internal rate ofreturn are disinclined to invest in such markets.

In the area of taxation, the Nigeria’s tax system and for most emergent economiesmust be well defined and communicated to eliminate ambiguities, discriminatory andnon-inclusive tax structure and issues of multiple taxations. Also, the taxpayers must beadequately enlightened and educated on the need to discharge their civic responsibility oftax payments, while the government must strive to engender trust on the part of thetaxpayers in relation to prudent administration of the tax revenues which accrue to thegovernment. For instance, in a study of attitude towards taxation in four African countries,Ali et al. (2014) found that tax-compliance attitude is positively correlated with provision ofpublic services in all the four countries and that tax knowledge and awareness are positivelycorrelated with tax-compliance attitude. Conversely, individual’s perception ofmarginalisation of their own ethnic group by the government was found to be negativelycorrelated with tax-compliance attitude. Low levels of compliance, tax evasion anddifficulties with tax administration have been found to be major challenges impedingdomestic revenue mobilisation in most African countries (AfDB, 2011).

Generally, a property tax system cannot operate in isolation of the institutional context ofthe particular market (Fischel, 2000). Thus, for an urban land market to work effectively forproperty-based financing schemes it has to be built on an institutional framework withclearly assigned and well-enforced property rights that induce capacity in both the publicand private sector. The potential of a TIF programme to deliver outcomes is contingent onthe capacity of relevant stakeholders: developers, financiers, planning agencies and localauthorities, and the degree to which they have access to necessary resources, powers andexpertise. Root et al. (2015) argue that institutions are central to public finance and spatialplanning given formal institutions influence access to resources and structure agencyrelations in terms of the strategies, interests and actions of actors, the rules which theyadhere to in governing their behaviour, and the ideas they draw upon in developing theirstrategies (see also, Healey and Barrett, 1990). Thus, institutional uncertainties associatedwith land use and property rights and restrictions imposed on property tax use must beeliminated for the urban land market to serve as a useful medium of financing publicinfrastructure development. For instance, uncertainties and bureaucracies regarding legal,administrative and regulatory requirements and even political considerations mayrepresent limitations for municipalities to operationalise TIF as a financing instrument forurban regeneration. In this context, Root et al. (2015) note that institutional constraints mayextend beyond legal and regulatory issues, but may include cultural barriers such as norms,values and conventions that play a major role in defining policy instrument selection andshaping policy context.

285


USA

Furthermore, weak formal institutional framework and enforcement mechanism mayprovide an incentive for misallocation of resources or lack of transparency in theimplementation of a TIF programme (see Youngman, 2011). Thus, North (1990) argues thatefficient institutions reduce uncertainty in human exchange interactions by providingregularity and structure to political, social and economic exchange. However, in marketenvironments where formal institutions are poorly assigned and enforced, institutions mayimpact negatively on market outcomes. Against this background, the importance ofworkable institutions that enforce contractual agreement and police deviations cannot beoveremphasised in harnessing the gains of TIF.

In Nigeria, a number of laws and policies designed ostensibly to govern urbanland use planning and management have been enacted over the years. These include theLand Use Act of 1978, Urban Development Policy of 1992, Urban and RegionalPlanning Act 1992 and the Housing and Urban Development Policy of 2002 (Aribigbola,2008). In spite of these laws and policies, urban land use management and administrationhave been less than effective (Ikejiofor, 2009). Ikejiofor (2007) and Egbu et al. (2008)note that costs associated with ineffective land use planning system constitute amajor cost of property development in Nigerian cities. Arimah and Adeagbo (2000)further found that 83 per cent of residential developments in a major Nigerian citywere unauthorised and breached various aspects of planning legislations. Thus, for asuccessful implementation of TIF in Nigeria the land use planning system andadministration must be reviewed.

Another issue that affects the Nigerian urban economy is the dearth or non-existence ofreliable property market data. Accurate, timely and accessible market indices are central toa successful TIF programme as reliable market data drive property investment analysesand valuation. As Olapade and Olaleye (2018) argue, Nigeria property market is aparticularly opaque one where property data are not easily accessible. The implication ofpaucity of market data for a TIF programme is that big institutional investors will bedisinclined to invest in Nigeria where likely future real estate investment returns cannot bemeasured against some historic performance benchmarks. Thus, the development of acomprehensive and reliable databank for the Nigeria land and property markets is crucial tothe implementation of a TIF programme.

Similarly, in relation to the requirement of a functional capital market, it is important tonote that the Nigeria mortgage industry is presently largely underdeveloped (Nubi, 2010;Wapwera et al., 2011). This is for the most part a consequence of lack of transparency in themarket which makes accurate risk determination difficult further impacting the availabilityand price of investment capital (Adegun and Taiwo, 2011; Agboola, 2015). Thence, thecountry’s capital market must be developed while tax administration system must bereassessed and appropriate enforcement mechanisms put in place. According to a WorldBank report on tax across countries, the Nigerian tax revenue as a percentage of GDP hasconsistently declined from an all-time high of 5.459 in 2008 to 5.109, 2.266, 1.804, 1.557 and1.483 in years 2009–2013, respectively (World Bank Group, 2018).

Finally, the Nigeria institutional framework around property titling, valuation,compensation and overall operation of the property market must be strengthened.Agboola et al. (2017) observed a clear lack of confidence on the part of market actors in theinstitutions of the market regarding property rights protection. Also, title registration/perfection in Nigeria is particularly cumbersome and time consuming with average durationof around 132 days. This represents a significant risk to investors which is a consequence ofimperfections in the formal institutions of title registration (Agboola and Scofield, 2018).However, it is expected that if the above basic requirements are put in place, urbanregeneration using the TIF framework is likely to be a viable option for local infrastructuredevelopment financing in Nigeria.

286

SASBE7,3/4

4. ConclusionThis paper aims to shed some light on the potentials of TIF as a viable financial mechanismfor urban regeneration programmes in Nigeria. TIF remains an important financialinstrument that municipal governments have adopted for fostering and facilitating market-driven urban regeneration in the UK and the USA. The regeneration of major cities andtowns has been a policy objective of successive UK governments over several decades, whileurban regeneration efforts in the USA have been tailored towards a comprehensiveapproach to tackling the problems of poverty in distressed areas of large cities of thecountry (Adair et al., 2007; Carmon, 1999).

The maintenance and improvement of the social, physical and economic strength oftowns and cities is crucial to urban competitiveness and the growth and development of anyeconomy. Urban regeneration is a versatile means of improving the socio-economic status ofa city, stimulating growth and repositioning cities as the mainstays of economicdevelopment. However, the financial straits that typified most major economies followingthe global financial crisis have evidenced the need for a radical change in urbanregeneration policies that lessen the financial burden on the central government. TIF is aviable and important financial instrument that helps the government to achieve this.Essentially, TIF allows a local authority to trade anticipated future tax revenue for a presentbenefit on the assumption that properties within the designated TIF area will appreciate invalue and generate sufficient increment tax revenue to fund the infrastructureimprovements, often initially supported by a bond issue.

However, despite its growing importance, popularity and advantages, TIF as a source offinance for urban regeneration programmes has not been given commensurate attentionboth in practice and literature in most developing economies in Africa, and particularlyin Nigeria. This is counter-intuitive given the current decline in oil revenue receiptsand the attendant economic recession coupled with the huge deficit in infrastructure andhousing units of the country estimated at 18m (United Nations Population Division, 2008).Hence, there is a need to consider the potential of TIF as a viable source of revenue for urbanregeneration financing in Nigeria.

However, for an urban-property-based finance scheme like TIF to be successful, thereare basic requirements to be put in place particularly in the context of an emergentSub-Saharan African country. A functional urban land market with well-developed anddocumented market indices on performance measurement to serve as reliable benchmarksfor investors is a fundamental requirement coupled with an established land use planningsystem consisting of clear rules and effective decision-making processes. Furthermore, anactive capital market that is accessible to institutional and private developers is aprerequisite for a successful TIF programme with a viable tax administration system inplace. Most importantly, a property tax system cannot operate in isolation of theinstitutional context of the particular market. Thus, an efficient institutional frameworkwith clearly defined formal property rights and sound enforcement mechanisms tomonitor contractual agreements and to police deviations is crucial to the implementationof a successful TIF programme.

However, the Nigeria urban economy does not meet up adequately with these basicrequirements. Hence, a review of the Nigerian property tax system to incorporate TIF isexpedient. Importantly, the present tax administration structure of the country should bederegulated by providing enabling policies that devolve functions to local authorities toundertake TIF programmes and to administer revenues accruing from the same.The existing land use planning system must be re-evaluated and necessary adjustmentsand enforcement mechanisms put in place. Also, the institutional framework of propertyrights must be strengthened, while reliable property market databank is developed as wellas a functional and efficient capital market.

287


USA

These adjustments may not be more compelling than at a time like this given thedwindling revenues from the oil sector and the conspicuously increasing need to maintainmost cities of the country in a functional, habitable and economically competitive state. Thisis expected to reduce negative externalities such as slums, traffic congestion, pollution andexcessive strain on the available infrastructure in Nigeria’s cities, while increasing theproperty tax base of the government.

Note

1. According to recently published data by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Nigeria’seconomy is caught up in recession with negative growth recorded for the fifth consecutive quarter.However, though the economy shrank by 0.52 per cent in the first quarter of 2017, it represents animprovement compared to previous quarters. https://qz.com/989805/nigerias-economy-has-been-in-recession-for-the-fifth-consecutive-quarter/

References

Adair, A., Berry, J. and McGreal, S. (2003), “Financing property’s contribution to regeneration”, UrbanStudies, Vol. 40 Nos 5-6, pp. 1065-1080.

Adair, A., Berry, J., Hutchison, N. and McGreal, S. (2007), “Attracting institutional investment intoregeneration: necessary conditions for effective funding”, Journal of Property Research, Vol. 24No. 3, pp. 221-240.

Adair, A., Berry, J., McGreal, S., Deddis, B. and Hirst, S. (2000), “The financing of urban regeneration”,Land Use Policy, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 147-156.

Adams, D. and Watkins, C. (2014), “The value of planning”, RTPI Research Report No. 5, RTPI,London.

Adegun, O.B. and Taiwo, A.A. (2011), “Contribution and challenges of private sector participation inhousing in Nigeria: case study of Akure, Ondo state”, Journal of Housing and the BuiltEnvironment, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 457-467.

Adlington, G., Grover, R., Heywood, M., Keith, S., Munro-Faure, P. and Perrotta, L. (2000), “Developingreal estate markets in transition economies”, A Paper for the UN Intergovernmental Conference,Geneva, 6-8 December.

AfDB (2011), Domestic Resource Mobilisation for Poverty Reduction in East Africa: Lessons for TaxPolicy and Administration, The Knowledge and Information Centre (KVRC), AfricanDevelopment Bank, Tunis.

Agboola, A.O. (2015), “The commercial real estate investment market in Lagos, Nigeria: an institutionaleconomics analysis”, unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Accountancy, Finance and RealEstate, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen.

Agboola, A.O. and Scofield, D. (2018), “Time to completion in the Lagos commercial real estate market:an examination of institutional effects”, Journal of Property Research, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 1-21.

Agboola, A.O., Scofield, D. and Amidu, A. (2017), “Understanding property market operations from adual institutional perspective: the case of Lagos, Nigeria”, Land Use Policy, Vol. 68, pp. 89-96.

Ali, M., Fjeldstad, O.H. and Sjursen, I.H. (2014), “To pay or not to pay? Citizens’ attitudes toward taxationin Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, and South Africa”, World Development, Vol. 64, pp. 828-842.

Alm, J. (2015), “Financing urban infrastructure: knowns and unknowns and a way forward”, Journal ofEconomic Surveys, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 181-199.

Aribigbola, A. (2008), “Improving urban land use planning and management in Nigeria: the case ofAkure”, Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Vol. 3 No. 9, pp. 1-14.

Arimah, B.C. and Adeagbo, D. (2000), “Compliance with urban development and planning regulationsin Ibadan, Nigeria”, Habitat International, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 279-294.

288

SASBE7,3/4

Baum, A. and Murray, C. (2010), “Understanding the barriers to real estate investment in developingeconomies”, Journal of Valuation and Property Services, Vol. 10 No. 1.

Booth, P. (2005), “Partnerships and networks: the governance of urban regeneration in Britain”, Journalof Housing and the Built Environment, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 257-269.

Boston Consulting Group (2013), Bridging the Gap: Meeting the Infrastructure Challenge withPublic–Private Partnerships, Boston Consulting Group, Boston, MA.

Briffault, R. (2010), “The most popular tool: tax increment financing and the political economy of localgovernment”, The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 77, pp. 65-95.

Brown-Luthango, M. (2011), “Capturing land value increment to finance infrastructure investment –possibilities for South Africa”, Urban Forum, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 37-52.

Brueckner, J.K. (2001), “Tax increment financing: a theoretical inquiry”, Journal of Public Economics,Vol. 81 No. 2, pp. 321-343.

Carlson, G.E. (1992), “Making better use of tax increment financing”, Economic Development Review,Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 34-37.

Carmon, N. (1999), “Three generations of urban renewal policies: analysis and policy implications”,Geoforum, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 145-158.

Carroll, D.A. (2008), “Tax increment financing and property value: an examination of business propertyusing panel data”, Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 520-552.

Carter, A. (2005), “Strategy and partnership in urban regeneration”, in Roberts, P. and Sykes, H. (Eds),Urban Regeneration: A Handbook, Sage Publications, London, pp. 37-58.

Davidson, M. and Lees, L. (2005), “New-build ‘gentrification’ and London’s riverside renaissance”,Environment and Planning A, Vol. 37 No. 7, pp. 1165-1190.

Doucet, B. (2007), “Flagship regeneration: panacea or urban problem?”, paper presented at EURAConference – The Vital City, Glasgow, 12-14 September.

Dutton, C. (1991), “Legend of the unknown city”, in Loftman, P. and Nevin, B. (Eds), Prestige Projectsand Urban Regeneration in the 1980s and 1990s: A Review of Benefits and Limitations, Vol. 10,Nos 3-4, Planning Practice and Research, pp. 299-316.

Dye, R.F. and Merriman, D.F. (2000), “The effects of tax increment financing on economicdevelopment”, Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 306-328.

Egbu, A.U., Olomolaiye, P. and Gameson, R. (2008), “A neo-institutional economic critique of the systemfor allocating urban land and development rights in Nigeria”, Habitat International, Vol. 32No. 1, pp. 121-135.

Fischel, W. (2000), “Municipal corporations, homeowners, and the benefit view of the property tax”, inRoot, L., Van Der Krabben, E. and Spit, T. (Eds), Between Structures and Norms: Assessing TaxIncrement Financing for The Dutch Spatial Planning Toolkit, Town Planning Review, Vol. 86,No. 3, pp. 325-349.

Gibb, K. and O’Sullivan, A. (2010), “Housing-led regeneration and the local impacts of the creditcrunch”, Local Economy, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 94-107.

Gibson, D. (2003), “Neighborhood characteristics and the targeting of tax increment financing inChicago”, Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 309-327.

Gordon, J.N. (1999), “Rising market efficiency: property enters the mainstream”, in Lee, S. (Ed.),The Risks of Investing in the Real Estate Markets of the Asian Region, The Department of LandManagement, The University of Reading, Reading, MA.

Hackworth, J. (2002), “Postrecession gentrification in New York City”, Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 37No. 6, pp. 815-843.

Hackworth, J. and Smith, N. (2001), “The changing state of gentrification”,Tijdschrift voor Economischeen Sociale Geografie, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 464-477.

Hall, S. and Hickman, P. (2002), “Managing urban neighbourhoods in decline: a comparison of newapproaches in England and France”, paper presented at the 32nd Annual Meeting of the UrbanAffairs Association, Boston, MA.

289


USA

Hambleton, R. (1991), “The regeneration of US and British cities”, in Loftman, P. and Nevin, B. (Eds),Prestige Projects and Urban Regeneration in the 1980s and 1990s: A Review of Benefits andLimitations, Vol. 10, Nos 3-4, Planning Practice and Research, pp. 299-316.

Hambleton, R. (1993), “Issues for urban policy in the 1990s”, Town and Planning Review, Vol. 64 No. 3,pp. 313-323.

Haran, M., Newell, G., Adair, A., McGreal, S. and Berry, J. (2011), “The performance of UK regenerationproperty within a mixed asset portfolio”, Journal of Property Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 75-95.

Healey, P. (1995), “The institutional challenge for sustainable urban regeneration”, Cities, Vol. 12 No. 4,pp. 221-230.

Healey, P. and Barrett, S.M. (1990), “Structure and agency in land and property development processes:some ideas for research”, Urban Studies, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 89-104.

Huddleston, J.R. (1982), “Local financial dimensions of tax increment financing: a cost revenueanalysis”, Public Budgeting and Finance, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 40-49.

Ikejiofor, U. (2007), “The impact of customary landholding on emerging land markets in Enugu,Nigeria”, working paper, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA.

Ikejiofor, U. (2009), “Planning within a context of informality: issues and trends in land delivery inEnugu, Nigeria”, unpublished case study prepared for the Global Report on Human Settlements.

Immergluck, D. (2009), “Large redevelopment initiatives, housing values and gentrification: the case ofthe Atlanta Beltline”, Urban Studies, Vol. 43 No. 8, pp. 1725-1747.

Imrie, R. and Thomas, H. (1999), British Urban Policy, Sage Publications, London.

Jolin, M., Legenza, S. and Mcdermott, M. (1998), “Tax increment financing: urban renewal of the 1990s”,Clearinghouse Review, Vol. 32, July/August, pp. 81-99.

Jonas, A.E.G. and Ward, K. (2002), “A world of regionalisms? Towards a US–UK urban and regionalpolicy framework comparison”, Journal of Urban Affairs, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 377-401.

Kauko, T. (2012), “Recreating residential property values in the inner city – an adapted ‘old’institutional approach”, Journal of Property Research, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 153-176.

Keogh, G. and D’Arcy, E. (1994), “Market maturity and property market behaviour: a Europeancomparison of mature and emergent markets”, Journal of Property Research, Vol. 11 No. 3,pp. 215-235.

Klemanski, J.S. (1989), “Tax increment financing: public funding for private economic developmentprojects”, Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 656-671.

Leavitt, W.M., Morris, J.C. and Lombard, J.R. (2008), “Developing infrastructure through the use of taxincrement financing: the case of the Virginia Beach town center project”, Public WorksManagement and Policy, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 92-99.

Lee, S. and Stevenson, S. (2005), “Testing the statistical significance of sector and regionaldiversification”, Journal of Property Investment and Finance, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 394-411.

Lee, S., Lizieri, C. and Ward, C. (2000), The Time Series Performance of UK Real Estate Indices, TheUniversity of Reading, Reading, August.

Lefcoe, G. (2011), “Competing for the next hundred million Americans: the uses and abuses of taxincrement financing”, Urban Layer, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 427-482.

Leyira, C.M., Chukwuma, E. and Asian, A.U. (2012), “Tax system in Nigeria – challenges and the wayforward”, Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 9-16.

Loftman, P. and Nevin, B. (1995), “Prestige projects and urban regeneration in the 1980s and 1990s: areview of benefits and limitations”, Planning Practice and Research, Vol. 10 Nos 3-4, pp. 299-316.

McGreal, S., Berry, J., Lloyd, G. and McCarthy, J. (2002), “Tax-based mechanisms in urban regeneration:Dublin and Chicago models”, Urban Studies, Vol. 39 No. 10, pp. 1819-1831.

Man, J.Y. (1999), “Fiscal pressure, tax competition and the adoption of tax increment financing”, UrbanStudies, Vol. 36 No. 7, pp. 1151-1167.

290

SASBE7,3/4

National Tax Policy (2012), available at: www.firs.gov.ng/TaxManagement/Tax%20Legislations/NATIONAL%20TAX%20POLICY.df (accessed 25 October 2017).

NCE (2014), “Steering urban growth: governance, policy and finance”, Paper No. 2, The New ClimateEconomy – The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, NCE Cities, London.

North, D.C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.

Nubi, T.G. (2010), “Towards a sustainable housing finance in Nigeria”, Housing Finance International,Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 22-28.

Odusola, A. (2006), “Tax policy reforms in Nigeria”, Research Paper No. 2006/3, United NationsUniversity, World Institute for Development Economies Research, Helsinki.

OECD (2007), Infrastructure to 2030: Mapping Policy for Electricity, Water and Transport, Vol. 2,OECD, Paris.

Olapade, D.T. and Olaleye, A. (2018), “Resolving the data debacle in commercial property: are propertypractitioners in opaque markets ready for data sharing and assemblage”, Journal of PropertyInvestment and Finance, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 295-304.

Parkinson, M., Ball, M., Blake, N. and Key, T. (2009), The Credit Crunch and Regeneration: Impact andImplications, Communities and Local Government, London.

RICS (2012), Tax Increment Financing: An Opportunity for the UK, Royal Institution of CharteredSurveyors, London.

Roberts, P. (2005), “The evolution, definition and purpose of urban regeneration”, in Roberts, P. andSykes, H. (Eds), Urban Regeneration: A Handbook, Sage Publications, London, pp. 9-36.

Roberts, P. and Sykes, H. (2005), “Current challenges and future prospects”, in Roberts, P. and Sykes, H.(Eds), Urban Regeneration: A Handbook, Sage Publications, London, pp. 295-315.

Root, L., Van Der Krabben, E. and Spit, T. (2015), “Between structures and norms: assessing tax incrementfinancing for the Dutch spatial planning toolkit”, Town Planning Review, Vol. 86 No. 3, pp. 325-349.

Schulte, K., Rottke, N. and Pitschke, C. (2005), “Transparency in the German real estate market”,Journal of Property Investment and Finance, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 90-108.

Smith, B.C. (2006), “The impact of tax increment finance districts on localized real estate: evidence fromChicago’s multifamily markets”, Journal of Housing Economics, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 21-37.

Spirou, C. and Loftman, C. (2004), “Cultural policy and urban redevelopment: a comparative analysisof downtown restructuring and social inclusion in Chicago and Birmingham (UK)”,paper presented at the “City Futures International Conference”, Chicago, IL, 8-10 July.

Squires, G. (2012), “Research papers ‘dear prudence’: an overview of tax increment financing”, Journalof Urban Regeneration and Renewal, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 356-366.

Squires, G. and Hutchison, N. (2014), “The death and life of tax increment financing (TIF)”, PropertyManagement, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 368-377.

Squires, G. and Lord, A.D. (2012), “The transfer of tax increment financing (TIF) as an urban policy forspatially targeted economic development”, Land Use Policy, Vol. 29, pp. 817-826.

Tallon, A. (2010), Urban Regeneration and Renewal, Routledge, London.

Turok, I. (1992), “Property-led urban regeneration: panacea or placebo?”, Environment and Planning A,Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 361-379.

United Nations Population Division (2008), World Urbanization Prospects: The 1999 Revision – KeyFindings, available at: www.un.org/esa/population/pubsarchive/urbanization/urbanization.pdf(accessed 22 October 2017).

Van Gent, W.P.C. (2010), “Housing context and social transformation strategies in neighbourhoodregeneration in western European cities”, International Journal of Housing Policy, Vol. 10 No. 1,pp. 63-87.

Wapwera, S.D., Parsa, A. and Egbu, C. (2011), “Financing low income housing in Nigeria”, Journal ofFinancial Management of Property and Construction, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 283-301.

291


USA

Weber, R., Bhatta, S.D. and Merriman, D. (2003), “Does tax increment financing raise urban industrialproperty values?”, Urban Studies, Vol. 40 No. 10, pp. 2001-2021.

Weber, R., Bhatta, S.D. and Merriman, D. (2007), “Spillovers from tax increment financing districts:implications for housing price appreciation”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 37No. 2, pp. 259-281.

World Bank Group (2018), “Tax report”, available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS?locations=NG (accessed 20 June 2018).

Youngman, J.M. (2011), “TIF at a turning point: defining debt down”, Working Paper No. WP11JY,Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, MA, available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1865995 (accessed 26 October 2017).

Further reading

JLL (2006), “Global transparency index”, Jones Lang LaSalle, available at: www.joneslanglasalle.co.jp/japan/jajp/Documents/Transparency/JLL_Transparency_2006_E.pdf (accessed September 20, 2017).

Corresponding authorAlirat Olayinka Agboola can be contacted at: [email protected]


292

SASBE7,3/4

Determination of urban sprawl’sindicators toward sustainable

urban developmentMohammad Paydar

Center for Sustainable Urban Development (CEDEUS),Faculty of Architecture, Design and Urban Studies,

Pontifical Catholic University of Chile (UC),Santiago, Chile, and

Enayatollah RahimiDepartment of Urban Studies, Azad University of Yasuj,

Shiraz, Iran

AbstractPurpose – Iran’s metropolitan areas are growing rapidly, and, among them, Shiraz has experienced a highrate of urban sprawl in recent decades. On the other hand, besides wasting the resources, urban sprawl doesnot follow the principles of sustainable urban development and its consideration would help to determine andemploy the required type of sustainable urban development approach. The purpose of this paper is to assessurban sprawl in Shiraz.Design/methodology/approach – First, the indicators and their weights for Shiraz’s sprawl assessmentare identified through Delphi and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methods. In addition, the degree ofurban sprawl is assessed using the preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluations(PROMETHEE).Findings – The Delphi method produced the four criteria of “land use,” “urban fabric,” “socialcharacteristics,” and “accessibility,” and “urban fabric”was the most important criterion per the AHP. Finally,the results of the PROMETHEE analysis indicated a high amount of urban sprawl in most of Shiraz’smunicipal zones.Practical implications – Therefore, due to the high degree of urban sprawl in Shiraz and its geographicallimitations for horizontal development, a study on sustainable approaches to urban development in Shiraz,including Smart Growth and sustainable urban regeneration, seems mandatory for this city. However, thisstudy indicates the requirement for more studies on urban sprawl in major cities of Iran, but by comparison ofthese findings with other relevant studies, it is inferred that using sustainable urban development approachesseems crucial for the majority of the cities in this country. Finally guidelines on how to impede urban sprawland encourage sustainable urban development in Shiraz and Iranian cities as well as certain implications inthis regard are discussed.Originality/value – The findings of this study are expected to contribute valuable information for policymakers in terms of urban planning and the development of the cities in Iran.Keywords Iran, Delphi technique,Preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluations PROMETHEE model, Shiraz,Urban sprawl, Analytical hierarchy process AHPPaper type Research paper

1. IntroductionRecognition of urban form – as well as the pattern of its physical development – is one ofthe fundamental issues that needs to be addressed to achieve the right urban planningpolicies and sustainable urban development (Sheykhi et al., 2012; Schwarz, 2010;Steadman et al., 2000; Grimm et al., 2008). Such development not only contributes toimproving the quality of the urban environment but also provides the basis for resolvingthe social, economic and environmental issues in the city ( Jabareen, 2006; Habib, 2006).In recent decades, the expansion of cities caused by population growth and migration hasled to unplanned construction, changes in spatial structures and especially unplanned


Vol. 7 No. 3/4, 2018pp. 293-308


DOI 10.1108/SASBE-03-2017-0010

Received 10 March 2017Revised 5 October 2017

12 March 201818 May 2018

Accepted 4 July 2018


293

Determinationof urbansprawl’s

indicators


physical developments in natural places around the cities (Ziyari, 2003; Hosseinzade et al.,2006; Mansouri, 2013; Nazariyan, 2002). In fact, due to the rapid growth of cities in recentdecades, dispersed growth on undeveloped land around the cities and metropolitan areas,or urban sprawl, has advanced. Suburban sprawl has had a dominant growth and patternfor nearly all metropolitan areas in the USA for the past five decades (Bullard et al., 2000).Today, over 60 percent of Americans live in the suburbs that are expected to account for80 percent of future metropolitan growth if the current trends are hold (Bullard et al.,2000). Sprawl has pushed housing, population and jobs deeper into the suburbs. On thisbasis, and regarding the rapid population growth in major cities and the lack ofappropriate places for urban development, how the physical development occurs willdetermine how effectively it meets the needs of current and future urban residents(Kalantari, 2006). Since urban sprawl does not follow the principles of sustainable urbandevelopment such as compact, connected, mixed and integrated kinds of urban growth(Ferdowsian, 2002), it may contribute to several undesired problems in cities. The effectsof suburban sprawl includes increasing health and safety risks, worsening air and waterpollution, urban decline, disappearing farmland and wildlife habitat, racial polarization,city/suburban disparities in public education, lack of affordable housing and erosion ofcommunities (Bullard et al., 2000). Thus, measuring the level of urban sprawl in the bigcities and metropolitan areas will facilitate appropriate planning for the futuredevelopment of these cities.

In addition, although many researches have focused on urban sprawl in developedcountries such as the USA, the causes and effects of urban sprawl and especially itsmeasurement process have not been considered comprehensively in the developing nations.In this regard, cities of Iran as one of these developing countries are growing rapidly. Shirazis one of the metropolises of Iran that has a population of about 1.5m and geographicalconstraints, in terms of its topography and climate, for horizontal development. Despite thislimitation, and based on observations from different areas of the city, it is inferred thatShiraz has experienced unplanned construction and urban sprawl in its different areas inrecent decades. Therefore, a study is needed to measure the extent of urban sprawl indifferent municipal zones of Shiraz in order to improve/accelerate the planning process forits future urban development.

This study measures urban sprawl in different municipal zones of Shiraz. To do so, first,the criteria for urban sprawl in different zones of Shiraz are determined and weighted. Finally,a comparative assessment of different municipal zones of Shiraz in terms of the extent of theirurban sprawl is conducted. The research questions of this research are as follow:

RQ1. How the measurement of urban sprawl in Shiraz as a city located in a developingcountry is to be addressed in order to improve future development in such cities?

RQ2. What are the criteria and sub-criteria of urban sprawl in city of Shiraz, Iran andwhat is the weight of each criterion and sub-criterion to measure urban sprawl inthis city?

RQ3. What is the current situation of urban sprawl in different municipality zones ofShiraz, Iran?

2. Literature reviewSeveral studies have been conducted on urban sprawl in cities. Some of these haveconsidered the reasons for sprawl and its effects on other issues in the urban environment(Bullard et al., 2000; Burchfield et al., 2004; Heinlich and Andersen, 2001; Rusk, 1999; Squires,2002) while others have focused on criteria for measuring urban sprawl in different contexts(Angel et al., 2007; Galster et al., 2001; Penc, 2008). For instance, road congestion and air

294

SASBE7,3/4

pollution are certain consequences of suburban sprawl in Atlanta metropolitan region; andsingle family residential subdivisions is one of the reasons of the suburban sprawl in thiscity (Bullard et al., 2000). Few researches have focused on the relation of urban sprawl to therace (Powell, 2002). For instance, Stoll (2005) has analyzed the influence of the job sprawl onthe geographic separation of blacks from jobs in US’s metropolitan areas and found asignificant positive correlation between job sprawl and the mismatch conditions faced bythe blacks.

In most of these studies, Smart Growth has been mentioned as a paradox of sprawl, inwhich urban sprawl could be replaced with Smart Growth, a positive approach that iscongruent with sustainable urban development. In many American cities, Smart Growth hasbeen promoted and applied to resist the expansion of urban sprawl in cities (Bollens, 2005).Likewise, Batisani and Yarnal (2011) who evaluated the relationships between smart growthpolicies and housing prices as well as the affordable housing in Gaborone, Botswana foundthat smart growth policies, besides restricting the development of urban sprawl, could beused to encourage investments in land and housing construction. It reduces the housingshortage and the high cost of land in the inner city.

Zhu et al. (2009), in addition to comparing the principles and strategies of urbansprawl and Smart Growth, considered urban sprawl and its effects in Lanzhou, located innortheastern China. They found that the effects of urban sprawl in Lanzhou were deviationsfrom the development predicted in the master plan of this city, and included a reducedability to use inner-city urban lands for construction, land-use changes in terms of areduction of the total areas of green spaces in urban suburbs, and negative interventions onagricultural land uses in these areas. They finally concluded that it is possible to restricturban sprawl development by adopting Smart Growth-related strategies, such as promotingmulti-central development of the city, establishing some legal limitations for horizontaldevelopment in the city’s suburbs, restricting the provision of urban amenities, andprotecting natural ecosystems and open spaces in these areas.

Azizi and Mohammadi (2014), in their study of the reasons for urban sprawl in the city ofBojnourd, Iran, found that the increasing urban sprawl in this city was due to a growingmigration to Bojnourd, an insufficient number of urban amenities in inner-city areas, ascompared to their population-growth rate, and the high price of lands and houses, especiallyin inner-city areas. Dadashpour and Salariyan (2015), who studied urban sprawl in Sari,north of Iran, found that the residents’ preference for a single-family-dwelling lifestyle in thelow-priced lands around the city has been the most important reason for the increasingurban sprawl east and west of Sari.

In addition, several indicators of urban sprawl have been found in the studies whichfocused on criteria and measurement of urban sprawl. Azizi and Mohammadi (2014) found15 sub-criteria and 4 criteria of urban sprawl in Bojnourd, Iran, including centrality, mixland uses, density and accessibility and measured them in this city in two years of 2004 and2011. They concluded that in overall urban sprawl has been increased in Bojnourd.

Zebardast and Shad Zaviyeh (2011) identified factors affecting urban sprawl in 30 areasof Urumie, Iran, and identified nineteen indicators to measure urban sprawl in Urumie.Some of these indicators are land-use composition, shape, diversity, consistency andfracture indexes, the average size of blocks, building density and gross population density.They concluded that those areas that arose during the initial formation of the city have thelowest urban sprawl.

Ahmadi et al. (2010) examined urban sprawl in three central cities of Iran includingSanandaj, Ardebil, and Kashan, and found that the lack of centrality and weaknesses ofmixed land uses were the major criteria for urban sprawl in these cities.

Penc (2008) measured urban sprawl in Omaha, Nebraska, the USA, with indicators thatincluded residential unit and workplace densities, and the proximity of workplaces to

295


indicators

housing units. Glaeser et al. (2001) found that the indicators of job sprawl in metropolitanareas of the USA included density, continuity, centrality, dependence on the center, mixedland uses and adjacency. Table I summarizes the various factors used to measure urbansprawl in different studies.

Factors affecting the measurement of urban sprawl

Studies onurban sprawl

Populationdensity Accessibility

Mixedlanduses Centrality Compactness

Irregularshape ofbuilt areas Other factors

Couch andKarech (2007)

| Indicators of changes indensity based ondistance with CBD,development in theareas over the currentboundaries of the city,different types oftransport usage

Doleny (2007) Greenhouse gasemissions in home-work trips

Angel et al.(2007)

| | Development to theextent of walkinginability, lower densityof people living orworking in the citycenter, presence ofvacant lots, lack ofcontinuity and creationof open spaces

Gaynor(2006)

| | | |

Frenkel andAshkenazi(2008)

| | | discontinuity,separation of land use

Penc (2008) Density of residentialunits, density ofworkplaces, proximityof workplaces tohousing units

Torrens(2008)

| | Urban growth, socialfactors, activity spaces,fragmentation,decentralization

Ahmadi et al.(2010)

| | | space activities

Zebardastand ShadZaviyeh(2011)

| | | | space activities

Azizi andMohammadi(2014)

| | | |

Galster et al.(2001)

| | | | | Concentration,Nuclearity, Continuityand Diversity of landuses

Table I.Factors influencingthe amount of urbansprawl in previousstudies

296

SASBE7,3/4

3. Case study and research methodologyShiraz is the capital city of the state of Fars, located in central-southwest Iran (Figure 1).This city has a population of almost 1.5m people, and had nine municipal zones in 2012 thatwere recently changed to ten.

To confirm the criteria suitable for assessing urban sprawl in Shiraz, first, the criteriaand sub-criteria of urban sprawl used in previous research were extracted and listed(Table I). Then, the Delphi method was employed to finalize the criteria and sub-criteria(Helmer-Hirschberg, 1967). The Delphi method is a systematic research approach used toextract the comments of a group of experts regarding an issue or a question. Three criteriawere used to select the experts (Okoli and Pawlowski, 2004). These criteria includedat least three years of relevant work experience, a relevant academic education and havinglived in Shiraz for at least three years in order to be familiar with the city. Finally, based onthese criteria and purposive sampling, 33 experts were selected to participate in theDelphi method.

By determination of criteria and sub-criteria of urban sprawl in Shiraz, the weight of eachfactor is to be determined as well. To determine the weight of each factor and sub-factor,Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used. AHP is a flexible, strong and simple methodfor decision-making (Bertolini et al., 2006). This technique creates a mathematicalmulti-criteria analysis in decision-making process (Mohanty et al., 2007). AHP lets thepair-wise comparison of the criteria in order to determine the weight of each factor in theanalysis. Thus, it provides an easier and more confident process as compared to other types

Metroploitan ofShirazCity of Shiraz State of Fars

Country of IranFigure 1.

Location of city ofShiraz in state of Fras

and country of Iran

297


indicators

of decision-making analysis. It also prevents involvement of any sort of prejudice in theprocess of analysis (Hasaninezhad, 2014).

Finally, to evaluate the current situation of urban sprawl in Shiraz, different municipalzones of Shiraz were compared using the preference ranking organization method forenrichment evaluations (PROMETHEE). To use this model, first, the actual amount of thedetermined criteria and sub-criteria in each zone were extracted using an ArcGIS analysis ofa map of each zone, and the Shiraz statistical yearbook, published by the municipality ofShiraz each year. The measurement was completed using field observational analysis. Forinstance, field observational analysis was required to update the number of schools andshopping centers on the maps. PROMETHEE is a type of multi-criteria decision-makinganalysis. It is rather a simple ranking method in the concept and function in comparisonwith other methods used for multi-criteria analysis. It is well adjusted to problems where alimited number of alternatives are to be ranked based on several and sometimesincompatible criteria (Albadvi et al., 2007). In recent years, the PROMETHEE has beenrecognized as being one of the most appreciated multi-criteria decision-making methods. Inthis model, the order of priorities is determined based on subtracting the positive andnegative flows of data to arrive at the net output flow.

AHP–PROMETHEE integrated approach has been applied in several studies so far(Dagdeviren, 2008; Macharis et al., 2004; Nasiri et al., 2013; Turcksin et al., 2011). The reasonis that PROMETHEE does not provide any formal guidelines on how the weights of thecriteria can be extracted. And it is assumed that the decision-maker is able to weight thecriteria appropriately at least when the number of criteria is not too large (Turcksin et al.,2011). For large amounts of criteria Macharis et al. (2004) advise to determine weightsaccording to several methods and this study used AHP to determine the weights of eachcriterion and sub-criterion.

4. ResultsUsing factors derived from previous studies, the questionnaire based on the structure of theDelphi method was designed and distributed among the selected experts. After three roundsof the Delphi technique, 21 indicators of sprawl assessment were approved. These indicatorswere categorized into four groups, which were titled urban fabric, land use,socio-demographic factors and accessibility (Table II).

Criteria AccessibilitySocio-demographicfactors The urban fabric Land use

Sub-criteria

Distance from the CBD Gross population density Number of housingunits per hectare

Ratio of the abandonedlands

Length of the roadwaynetwork accessible topedestrians

Ratio of Net populationdensity to densest part ofthe city

Irregularity ofbuilt areas

Ratio of building areasto total land areas

Average distance of theadjacent blocks

Ratio of the number ofhouseholds to number ofhouses

Ratio of inefficientland uses to totalarea

Combination ofcommercial andindustrial land uses

Rate of density reductionfrom the center

– Average size ofurban parcels

Combination ofadministrative andpublic land uses

Average distance ofblocks from schools

– Average size ofblocks

Combination of mixedland uses

Average distance ofblocks from shoppingcenters

– Average numberof buildings’ floors

Ratio of Garden-cultivated land uses tototal land uses

Table II.Criteria and sub-criteria of urbansprawl in Shiraz

298

SASBE7,3/4

The weights of four criteria and their sub-criteria based on the AHP method and using 30experts are shown in Table III. Urban fabric, with a ratio of 0.312, has the highest coefficient,and accessibility, with a ratio of 0.199, has lowest coefficient. Figure 2 shows the share of thecoefficient value of each criterion relative to the whole, and shows a higher proportion ofurban fabric compared to other criteria. In addition, as shown in Table III the sub-criteria of“average size of blocks,” “the number of housing units per hectare” and “irregularity of built

Criteria

Weightof eachcriteria Priority Sub-Criteria

Primaryweight ofeach sub-criterion

Finalweight ofeach sub-criterion Priority

Accessibility 0.199 4 Distance from the CBD 0.191 0.041 12Length of the roadway networkaccessible to pedestrians

0.154 0.033 15

Average distance of the adjacent blocks 0.205 0.044 11Rate of density reduction from the center 0.177 0.038 14Average distance of blocks from schools 0.145 0.031 16Average distance of blocks fromshopping centers

0.127 0.027 17

Socio-Demographicfactors

0.221 3 Gross population density 0.360 0.049 8Ratio of Net population density todensest part of the city

0.303 0.041 12

Ratio of the number of households tonumber of houses

0.337 0.046 9

The urbanfabric

0.312 1 Number of housing units per hectare 0.186 0.064 2Irregularity of built areas 0.182 0.063 3Ratio of inefficient land uses to total area 0.149 0.051 6Average size of urban parcels 0.131 0.045 10Average size of blocks 0.200 0.069 1Average number of buildings’ floors 0.153 0.053 5

Land use 0.268 2 Ratio of the abandoned lands 0.193 0.059 4Ratio of building areas to total land areas 0.148 0.045 10Combination of commercial andindustrial land uses

0.166 0.050 7

Combination of administrative and publicland uses

0.164 0.050 7

Combination of mixed land uses 0.133 0.040 13Ratio of Garden-cultivated land uses tototal land uses

0.196 0.059 4

Note: Overall inconsistency ¼ 0.00

Table III.The weight of

four criteria andtheir sub-criteria

based on AHP method

Land use

Accessibility

The urban fabric Socia-demographicfactors

Figure 2.Comparison of

the ratio of eachcriteria to whole

299


indicators

areas” under criteria of “the urban fabric” are the most important indicators of urban sprawlin Shiraz. Overall, the most important indicators of urban sprawl belong to two criteria of“the urban fabric” and “land use.”

The weight of each criterion and sub-criterion, and the actual amounts of each factor indifferent municipal zones of Shiraz, were entered into the PROMETHEE model. The resultsof the PROMETHEE model in terms of positive and negative flows for each zone are shownin Table IV.

After calculating the positive and negative flows, and by subtracting the negative flowsfrom the positive flows, the net final flow of each zone was obtained. Table V shows the finalnet flow of each municipal zone. The zones with higher net flows have higher rates of urbansprawl as well. As illustrated in Table V, and by the net output flow of each municipal zone,zones 6 and 8 have the highest and lowest rates of urban sprawl, respectively, among all thezones. After zone 6, zones 2 and 9 have the highest levels of urban sprawl, respectively. Incontrast, after zone 8, zones 4 and 5 have the lowest levels of urban sprawl, respectively.Zone 8, as part of the principle core of the city, has had organic growth in its development.Figure 3 shows the comparative level of urban sprawl among all municipal zones of Shiraz.

5. DiscussionAccording to the experts, the criteria of urban fabric and sub-criteria such as average blocksize, the number of housing units per hectare and the irregularity of the built areas are themost important indicators influencing urban sprawl in Shiraz. Previous studies alsomentioned physical factors such as lack of compactness, empty lands and the irregularshapes of the built areas as the factors that determined the amount of urban sprawl (Frenkeland Ashkenazi, 2008; Angel et al., 2007; Pence, 2008; Ahmadi et al., 2010). Land use is thesecond important criteria of urban sprawl in Shiraz. The sub-criteria such as “the ratio ofland uses which have development history, but have been abandoned,” “the ratio ofGarden-cultivated land uses to total land uses” and “the combination of commercial andindustrial land uses” as well as “the combination of administrative and public land uses” asthe important indicators of urban sprawl are dedicated to criteria of land use. These findingsalso support the results of the previous studies which found that mix land use with itsnegative correlation with urban sprawl is one of the important indicators to determine urban

Municipality zones Net flow(|) No. Municipality Zones Net flow(|) No.

Zone 6 0.5834 1 Zone 3 −0.2501 6Zone 2 0.5011 2 Zone 5 −0.3307 7Zone 9 0.4166 3 Zone 4 −0.4954 8Zone 7 0.2500 4 Zone 8 −0.6663 9Zone 1 0.0023 5 Use from preference Fn usual

Table V.Ranking ofmunicipality zones ofShiraz from highestamount of urbansprawl to lowestamount of urbansprawl

No. Municipality zone |þ |� No. Municipality zone |þ |�

1 Zone 1 0.5123 0.5100 6 Zone 6 0.7917 0.20832 Zone 2 0.7532 0.2521 7 Zone 7 0.6250 0.37503 Zone 3 0.3750 0.6251 8 Zone 8 0.1667 0.8334 Zone 4 0.2561 0.7515 9 Zone 9 0.7083 0.29175 Zone 5 0.3331 0.6638 10 Use from preference Fn usual

Table IV.Positive andqnegative flows ineach municipalityzones of Shiraz

300

SASBE7,3/4

sprawl (Ahmadi et al., 2010; Azizi and Mohammadi, 2014; Frenkel and Ashkenazi, 2008;Gaynor, 2006). Although presence of the abandoned lands as one of the importantsub-criteria could be taken into account as the new indicator to measure urban sprawl.

With regard to the amount of urban sprawl in different zones of Shiraz, zone 6 (Figure 3)has the highest rate of urban sprawl as compared to other municipal zones. This zone hasnot played any role in the development of the central core of the city, and it was developedbased on an increasing population rate, horizontal expansion of the city and the integrationof surrounding villages with the principle core of the city. The most important reasons forincreasing sprawl in this zone, as compared to other zones of the city, include the presence ofvacant lots, abandoned lands, electronic industrial areas, several detached and disconnectedvillages and low density arterial streets. After zone 6, zones 2 and 9 (Figure 3) have thehighest rates of sprawl among other zones, respectively. Zone 2 is adjacent to the principlecore of the city, and has a common boundary with this zone (Figure 3), but nevertheless,urban sprawl is still high in this zone as compared to other zones. This urban sprawl is aresult of the horizontal development of the city to southeast of Shiraz.

Zone 9 (Figure 3), located at the west of the city, has urban sprawl in its southeasternportion. This zone is located far from the primary core of the city. This zone has also beendeveloped due to the rapid development of different types of surrounding towns andvillages, and the integration of the old city boundary with these small towns and villages.Indeed, these small surrounding towns and villages mostly have been created on the basis ofprofiting certain people, which led to unplanned horizontal development and urban sprawlin those zones of the city.

Among all the municipal zones, zone 8 has the lowest amount of urban sprawl (Figure 3).Zone 8, which is part of the primary core of the city, has experienced organic growth, andnot the planned development observed in other parts of the city. The presence of organictexture, the formation of land uses based on residents’ needs at the time of construction,high rate of accessibility of different land uses to people with narrow and compact pathways(Paydar et al., 2017; Paydar and Kamani Fard, 2016), continuity of construction, andpopulation density in this region are the most important reasons for the lower amount ofurban sprawl in this zone, as compared to other zones of Shiraz. Although the number ofmulti-story buildings is fewer than in other zones of Shiraz and construction in this zone is

Rank SprawlZone

629

13548

7

Highest

Lowest

Figure 3.Distribution of

urban sprawl indifferent municipality

zones of Shiraz

301


indicators

directed more horizontally rather than vertically, it has less urban sprawl because of thecharacteristics such as much rate of irregularity of built areas, small size of the blocks andhaving a compact texture. Since compactness is one of the principles of Smart Growth, itcould be stated that zone 8 has been the municipality most consistent with the principles ofSmart Growth of all the municipal zones of Shiraz.

After zone 8, zones 4 and 5 have the lowest amount of urban sprawl among all the zones(Figure 3). Zone 4 is one of the regions affected by the secondary development of the city,but its growth is close to the organic development of zone 8, in which it is less affected by theintegration of the old boundary of the city and the surrounding small towns and villages.Zone 5 also has similar characteristics, in which, however, it is taken into account as thesecondary development of the city, but it is less affected by the integration of old areas withthe surrounding towns and villages. Therefore, it is stated that the zones with less urbansprawl in Shiraz have common characteristics in which they are less affected by the processof integration with the surrounding small towns and villages, and more compactness isobservable in the urban texture of these zones. In addition, organic urban texture isobservable in most of these regions. On the other hand, as stated earlier, many of theunplanned surrounding small towns and villages were created mostly for purposes ofsatisfying the financial interests of certain people; and they perform as the motivationalpoints for increasing the perimeter of the urban area and finally suburban sprawl. Thus, it isstated that urban sprawl is less if there are rules and regulations that restrict the creation ofsuch surrounding small towns and villages. Figure 4 shows zones 8 and 6 as the zones withthe lowest and highest amounts of urban sprawl, respectively.

It was found that most of the municipal zones of Shiraz, and especially zone 6, have ahigh amount of urban sprawl. On the other hand, Shiraz has limitations on its physicaldevelopment due to its geographical situation. First, it is located along two mountains thatenforce a linear type of development, and secondly, it has a hot climate, which necessitatesan arrangement of urban texture that resists the disadvantages of such a climate, and thisform is the compact form characteristic of ancient Iranian architecture and urbanism(Ferdowsian, 2002). Therefore, urban sprawl has many disadvantages for Shiraz. On thisbasis, the urban development of Shiraz should be consistent with sustainable urbandevelopment such as Smart Growth principles. Some of these principles include verticaldevelopment, more permeability in the urban fabric, which provides more accessibility andthe development of public spaces that are more accessible and usable by pedestrians.

Zone 8 withlowest sprawl

Zone 6 withhighest sprawl

Figure 4.Zone 8 and zone6 with lowest andhighest amountof urban sprawlin Shiraz

302

SASBE7,3/4

In addition, certain policies could be adopted to restrict urban sprawl, such as the reductionof inefficient public spaces and land uses, and the creation and modification of required landuses that have maximum compatibility with each other. It should be noted that Shiraz haslots of old texture in its ancient zones – such as zone 8. Parts of this texture that are notworthy of renovation could be used to modify the process of land uses in order to generatethe public spaces needed to allow development based on the principles of sustainable urbandevelopment such as Smart Growth and sustainable urban regeneration. Finally, relevantstudies found the similar findings in terms of existence of much urban sprawl in severalcities of Iran (Ahmadi et al., 2010; Azizi and Mohammadi, 2014; Zebardast, andShad Zaviyeh, 2011). Many of these cities have similar form/layout in terms of having acentral historical and compact zone and similar climate as well. This shows that urbandevelopment not only Shiraz, but also in several cities of Iran, needs a new approach basedon the principles of sustainable urban development.

Such an approach to the urban development of Shiraz and other Iranian cities is to be thesubject of other studies in the future. However, the development generally should be basedon the urban growth’s major principle as confining more people into existing urbanizedareas, but this anti-sprawl approach in Shiraz and other similar Iranian major cities has thefollowing aspects which should be considered in future researches:

(1) The creation of suburban industrial towns and areas may be due to the interests ofspecific people as parts of stakeholders and lack of comprehensive land usemanagement program by respected planning authorities which contribute tosuburban sprawl in these cities. Therefore, these organizing authorities should beequipped with certain preventive and restricted rules and regulations in this regard.

(2) Improving public transport as well as walking and cycling is one the principles ofsmart growth. Reviewing different modes of the transport in Shiraz and othersimilar cities of Iran reveals that a little attention has been paid to this matter by therespected authorities as well as inhabitants. It seems that transporting with privatecars is going to be the prominent travel attitude of the people and respectedauthorities such as municipalities strengthen by new highways’ construction anddeveloping car infrastructure. And this tendency encourages suburban sprawl insuch cities. It is while good transportation planning relies more on the mass transitsolutions such as light rail and commuter trains. In addition, awareness on thebenefits of using mass transport should be increased among people and become acultural trend through time.

For instance, the central region of these cities with appropriate walkinginfrastructure and tourist attractions should be more focused in order to enhance thewalking and cycling pattern of movement (Etminani-Ghasrodashti et al., 2018).These central regions containing the central business district are also the majordestinations of several urban daily trips of the inhabitants. And the daily trips of theinhabitants highlight the significance of considering the connectivity of the activetransport among other regions with these central regions. One of the ways ofstrengthening this connectivity is to improve the walking patterns as well as thecycling patterns around the origin and destination public transport stations of thesedaily trips such as bus and metro stations as well as facilitating the walkingmovements in the transfer points among the public transport system. This approachwould contribute to strengthen the public transport in these cities as well. Suchconsiderations should be more focused in the future researches.

(3) Despite the fact that the automobile has led to the sub-urbanization of the wealthy,the solution to this problem is not clear. One approach might be more tax charges forthe cars or higher parking fees to push back the inhabitants into the cities.

303


indicators

(4) The central regions of these cities also contain numerous old and abandonedbuildings which could be reused and used in order to conduct the future urbangrowth of such cities. Also building upwards rather than spreading horizontallycould be conducted in these areas. However, little attention has been paid torevitalize the older areas and the potential possible of urban growth in central areasof these cities.

(5) Opposed to the cities in the developed countries, suburban sprawl has been partlydue to high immigration of inhabitants of small towns and rural areas to the majorcities to provide them with work and better opportunities in the developingcountries (Bekele, 2005). This fact is true regarding the metropolitan areas of Iran aswell. Suburban sprawl – that could be highly observed in different municipalityzones of Shiraz – is partly the result of high immigration of people from rural areasto the city within the last decades. The main reasons for this pattern of immigrationhave not been studied in the Iranian cities and should be more focused andrecognized in the future researches. Improving the job situation and quality of thelife in the towns and rural areas could be one of the possibilities to impede anddecrease the immigration of the people to the major cities and creation of suburbansprawl in such metropolitan areas.

6. ConclusionsRecognition of the urban form, as well as the pattern of its physical development, is one ofthe fundamental issues for achieving the right urban planning policies and sustainableurban development. Such development not only contributes to improving the quality of theurban environment, but also provides the basis for improving the social, economic andenvironmental issues in the city. Shiraz is one of the metropolitan areas of Iran with apopulation of about 1.5m. This research aimed to consider the urban sprawl in differentmunicipal zones of Shiraz, because urban sprawl has increased in recent decades in this city.First, the criteria and sub-criteria of urban sprawl and their weighting in Shiraz weredetermined using the Delphi method and AHP. Then, using the coefficient of each criteriaand sub-criteria, and extracting the actual value for each variable from GIS analysis andother resources, the PROMETHEE model was used to compare the amount of urban sprawlin different municipal zones of Shiraz.

According to the experts, the criteria of urban fabric and sub-criteria such as averageblock size, the number of housing units per hectare and the irregularity of the built areas,are the most important indicators influencing urban sprawl in Shiraz. In addition, theresults of the PROMETHEE model indicated a significant amount of urban sprawl in mostof the municipal zones of Shiraz. Zone 6 has the highest rate of urban sprawl compared toother municipal zones. This zone has not played any role in the development of the centralcore of the city, and it was developed based on an increasing population rate, horizontalexpansion of the city, and the integration of surrounding villages with the principle core ofthe city. The most important reasons for increasing sprawl in this zone, as compared toother zones of the city, include the presence of vacant lots, abandoned lands, electronicindustrial areas, several detached and disconnected villages and low density arterialstreets. In contrast, Zone 8 has the highest rate of urban sprawl as compared to othermunicipal zones. Zone 8, which is part of the primary core of the city, has experienced anorganic growth rather than the unplanned development that is observed in other parts ofthe city. The presence of organic texture, the formation of land uses based on residents’needs at the time of construction, high rate of accessibility of different land uses to peoplewith narrow and compact pathways, the continuity of construction, and the populationdensity in this region are the most important reasons for the lower amount of urban

304

SASBE7,3/4

sprawl in this zone, as compared to other zones of Shiraz. In addition, it was found that thezones with less urban sprawl in Shiraz have the common characteristics of beingless affected by the process of integrating the old boundary with the surrounding smalltowns and villages, and more compactness is observable in the urban texture of thesezones. In addition, organic urban texture is observable in most of these regions. On theother hand, many of the unplanned surrounding small towns and villages were createdmostly based on satisfying the financial interests of certain people, and they function asmotivational points for lengthening the urban boundary and increasing sprawl. Thus, it isstated that urban sprawl is less if rules and regulations restrict the creation of suchsurrounding small towns and villages.

Shiraz has the limitation of physical development due to its geographical situation. First,it is located along two mountains which enforce only a linear type of development andsecond it has the hot climate which enforces the arrangement of urban texture to resist fromthe disadvantages of such climate and this form is to be close to the compact form as it is inIranian ancient architecture and urbanism. Therefore, urban sprawl has manydisadvantages for Shiraz. On this basis, urban development of Shiraz should be inadjustment with the sustainable urban development such as smart growth principles. Someof these principles are growing of vertical development, more permeability in the urbanfabric which provides more accessibility and development of public spaces more accessibleand usable for pedestrians. In addition, according to the previous studies, other Iraniancities with similar texture and climate have also suffered from much urban sprawl.Therefore, in general, urban development in Iranian cities needs new approach and this newapproach is to be based on the principles of sustainable urban development. Future studiescan focus on study and implementation of such sustainable urban development in Shirazand other Iranian cities which could be directed based on principles of Smart Growth andsustainable urban regeneration. Finally, this sustainable urban growth has certain aspectsin Iranian cities based on their main suburban sprawl’s causes and their adjusted potentialcharacteristics with pillars of the sustainable urban development. And in short, some ofthese aspects are providing certain restricted rules and regulations by the respectedauthorities in order to impede possibility of creation of suburban industrial towns and areasby parts of stakeholders, strengthening mass transit including the active transport aroundthe major metro and bus stations in origin and destinations points of daily trips among CBDand other regions of these cities as well as facilitating walking movement in transfer pointsof public transport systems, increasing car tax and parking fees in central areas of thesecities, revitalizing older areas of central regions of these cities in order to develop urbangrowth inside these cities, and finally considering and recognizing the main reasons of theimmigration of the people from adjacent towns and rural areas to the metropolitan areas tostop this tendency and decrease the suburban sprawl. Each of these aspects could befocused in the future researches in order to impede urban sprawl and develop in accordancewith pillars of the sustainable urban development.

References

Ahmadi, Gh., Azizi, M.M. and Zebardast, E. (2010), “Comparative study of city sprawl in three middlerange cities of Iran: Ardabil, Sanandaj and Kashan”, Journal of Architecture and UrbanPlanning, University of Arts, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 25-43.

Albadvi, A., Chaharsooghi, S.K. and Esfahanipour, A. (2007), “Decision making in stock trading: anapplication of PROMETHEE”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 177 No. 2,pp. 673-683.

Angel, S., Parent, J. and Civco, D. (2007), “Urban sprawl metrics: an analysis of global urban expansionusing GIS”, Proceedings of ASPRS 2007 Annual Conference, Tampa, FL,May 7-11, available at:http://clear.uconn.edu/publications/research/tech_papers/Angel_et_al_ASPRS2007.pdf

305


indicators

Azizi, M.M. and Mohammadi, S. (2014), “The impact of new country divisions on urban sprawl (casestudy: the city of Borujerd)”, Persian Journal of Fine Arts, Architecture and Urbanism, Vol. 19No. 2, pp. 37-56.

Batisani, N. and Yarnal, B. (2011), “Elasticity of capital-land substitution in housing construction,Gaborone, Botswana: implications for smart growth policy and affordable housing”, Landscapeand Urban Planning, Vol. 99 No. 2, pp. 77-82.

Bekele, H. (2005), “Urbanization and urban sprawl”, master of science thesis, Department ofInfrastructure Section of Building and Real Estate Economics, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan,Stockholm.

Bertolini, M., Braglia, M. and Carmignani, G. (2006), “Application of the AHP methodology in making aproposal for a public work contract”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24 No. 5,pp. 422-430.

Bollens, S. (2005), “Urban growth boundary”, in Caves, R.W. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the City, Routledge(Tylor & Francis Group), New York, NY and London, pp. 475-476.

Bullard, R.D., Johnson, G.S. and Torres, A.O. (Eds) (2000), Sprawl City: Race, Politics and Planning inAtlanta, Island Press, Washington, DC.

Burchfield, M., Henry, G.O., Diego, P. and Matthew, A.T. (2004), “The determinants of urban sprawl:a portrait from space”, working paper, Department of Economics, University of Toronto,Toronto.

Couch, C. and karech, J. (2007), “The consequences of urban sprawl: study of Wirral, Merseyside”,John Moore University, Liverpool.

Dadashpour, H. and Salariyan, F. (2015), “Analyzing the impact of urban sprawl on land use changes inthe region of Sari”, Geographical Studies of Urban Planning, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 145-163.

Dagdeviren, M. (2008), “Decision making in equipment selection: an integrated approach with AHP andPROMETHEE”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 397-406.

Doleny, T. (2007), Vertus: vehicle emissions related to urban Sprawl: a PhD thesis to Kent StateUniversity, OH.

Etminani-Ghasrodashti, R., Paydar, M. and Ardeshiri, A. (2018), “Recreational cycling in a coastal city:investigating lifestyle, attitudes and built environment in cycling behavior”, Sustainable Citiesand Society, Vol. 39, pp. 241-251.

Ferdowsian, F. (2002), “Modern and traditional urban design concepts and principles in Iran”, PhDthesis, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart.

Frenkel, A. and Ashkenazi, M. (2008), “A measuring urban sprawl: how can we deal with it?”,Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 56-79.

Galster, G., Hanson, R., Wolman, H., Coleman, S. and Freihage, J. (2001), “Wrestling Sprawl to theground: defining and measuring an elusive concept”, Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 12 No. 4,pp. 681-717.

Gaynor, J.P. (2006), Measuring Sprawl: As Study in the Urbanized Area of Binghamton, Binghamtonuniversity and State university of New York, NY.

Glaeser, E., Kahn, M. and Chu, C. (2001), Job Sprawl: Employment Location in US Metropolitan Areas,Center for Urban & Metropolitan Policy, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.

Grimm, N.B., Faeth, S.H., Golubiewski, N.E., Redman, C.L., Wu, J., Bai, X. and Brigss, J.M. (2008),“Global change and the ecology of cities”, Science, Vol. 319 No. 5864, pp. 756-760.

Habib, F. (2006), “Consideration of meaning of the city”, Journal of Fine Arts, Vol. 2, pp. 5-14.

Hasaninezhad, A. (2014), “Consideration of function of organizations, in charge of crisis management inShiraz”, Sustainable City, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 176-199.

Heinlich, R. and Andersen, W. (2001), “Development at the urban fringe and beyond: impacts onagriculture and rural land”, Economic Research Service, Agriculture Economics Report No. 803 ,US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.

306

SASBE7,3/4

Helmer-Hirschberg, O. (1967), Analysis of the Future: The Delphi Method, RAND Corporation, SantaMonica, CA, available at: www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P3558.html

Hosseinzadeh, Dalir, K. and houshyar, H. (2006), “The effective elements and viewpoints on thephysical development of cities in Iran”, Journal of Geography and Regional Development, Vol. 4No. 6, pp. 213-226.

Jabareen, Y.R. (2006), “Sustainable urban from: their typologies, models and concepts”, Journal ofPlanning Education and Research, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 38-52.

Kalantari, M. (2006), “Planning of sustainable urban development with emphasis on physicaldevelopment (Case study: city of Tafresh)”, master thesis, Department of Urban Studies,University of Tarbiyat Modarres, Tehran.

Macharis, C., Springael, J., Brucker, K.D. and Verbeke, A. (2004), “PROMETHEE and AHP: the designof operational synergies in multicriteria analysis, strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas ofAHP”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 153 No. 2, pp. 307-317.

Mansouri, S. (2013), “Borujerd’ smart growth with an emphasis on internal development”, urban masterthesis, Department of Urban Planning, Islamic Azad University of Hamedan, Hamedan.

Mohanty, W.K., Walling, Y., Nath, S.K. and Pal, I. (2007), “First order seismic microzonation of Delhi,India using Geographic Information System (GIS)”, Natural Hazard, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp 245-260.

Nasiri, H., Darvishi, A., Sabokbar, H.A., Jafari, H.R., Hamzeh, H. and Rafii, Y. (2013), “Determining themost suitable areas for artificial groundwater recharge via an integrated PROMETHEE II-AHPmethod in GIS, a case study in Garabaygan Basin, Iran”, Environmental Monitoring andAssessment, Vol. 185 No. 1, pp. 707-718.

Nazariyan, A. (2002), Urban Geography of Iran, Payame Noor Publication.

Okoli, C. and Pawlowski, S.D. (2004), “The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, designconsiderations and applications”, Information and Management, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 15-29.

Paydar, M. and Kamani-Fard, A. (2016), “Perceived Legibility in Relation to Path Choice of Commutersin Central Business District”, Urban Design International, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 213-235.

Paydar, M., Kamani-Fard, A. and Etminani-Ghasrodashti., R. (2017), “Perceived security of women inrelation to their path choice toward sustainable neighborhood in Santiago, Chile”, Cities, Vol. 60,pp. 289-300.

Pence, J. (2008), “Measuring Omaha, Nebraska’s urban sprawl from 1990-2000”, Master thesis,Department of Geography-Geology, University of Nebraska, Omaha, NE.

Powell, J. (2002), “Sprawl, fragmentation, and the persistence of racial inequality: limiting civil rights byfragmenting space”, in Gregory, D.S. (Ed.), Urban Sprawl: Causes, Consequences, and PolicyResponses, Urban Institute, Washington, DC.

Rusk, D. (1999), Inside Game/Outside Game: Winning Strategies for Saving Urban America, BrookingsInstitution Press, Washington, DC.

Schwarz, N. (2010), “Urban form revisited – Selecting indicators for characterizing European cities”,Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 96 No. 2010, pp. 29-47.

Sheykhi, H., Parizadi, T., Rezaei, M.R. and Sajjadi, M. (2012), “Analysis the morphological form ofIsfahan, Iran, using Gari and Moran models”, Iranian Journal of Research and Urban Planning,Vol. 3 No. 9, pp. 117-134.

Squires, G.D. (2002), “Urban Sprawl and the uneven development of metropolitan America”, in Squires,Gregory D. (Ed.), Urban Sprawl: Causes, Consequences, and Policy Responses, Urban Institute,Washington, DC.

Steadman, P., Bruhns, H.R., Holtier, S. and Gakivic, B. (2000), “A classification of built forms”,Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 73-91.

Stoll, M. (2005), “Job Sprawl spatial mismatch black unemployment disadvantaged”, Institute forResearch on Poverty Discussion Paper no. 1304-05, WI, available at: www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/dps/pdfs/dp130405.pdf

307


indicators

Torrens, P.M. (2008), “A toolkit for measuring sprawl”, Applied Spatial Analysis, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 5-36.

Turcksin, L., Bernardini, A. and Macharis, C. (2011), “A combined AHP-PROMETHEE approach forselecting the most appropriate policy scenario to stimulate a clean vehicle fleet”, Procedia Socialand Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 20, pp. 954-965.

Zebardast, E. and Shad Zaviyeh, H. (2011), “Identification of factors influencing urban sprawl and itsrelationship with urban spatial structure (Case Study: Urmia City)”, Journal of Architecture andUrban Planning, Vol. 4 No. 7, pp. 89-112.

Zhu, B., Li, X., Lei, j. and Zhang, X. (2009), “Urban spatial expansion based on “smart growth”,information science and engineering (ICISE)”, 1st International Conference on Nanjing,December 26-28.

Ziyari, K. (2003), “The socio-cultural changes orginating from industrial revolution in spatialdevelopment of Tehran”, Geography and Development Iranian Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 151-164.

Further reading

Alberti, M. (2005), “The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem function”, International Regional ScienceReview, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 168-192.

Frenkel, A. and Ashkenazi, M. (2008), “A measuring urban sprawl: how can we deal with it?”,Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 56-79.

Corresponding authorMohammad Paydar can be contacted at: [email protected]


308

SASBE7,3/4

EDITOR-IN-CHIEFProfessor Rob RoggemaUniversity of Technology Sydney, AustraliaE-mail [email protected]

EDITORProfessor Andy van den DobbelsteenDelft University of Technology, The NetherlandsE-mail [email protected]

REGIONAL EDITOR – EAST ASIADr Joseph LaiHong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong

THEME EDITORSDr Vanita AhujaAmity University, IndiaDr Nimish BiloriaUniversity of Technology, AustraliaDr Dirk ConradieCSIR, South AfricaMichael Davis M.Pontificia Universidad Católica of Ecuador, EcuadorDr Erwin Heurkens W.T.M.Delft University of Technology, The NetherlandsProfessor Doris KowaltowskiUniversity of Campinas, BrazilDr Wafaa NadimThe German University in Cairo, Egypt

ISSN 2046-6099© 2018 Emerald Publishing Limited

Emerald Publishing LimitedHoward House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, United KingdomTel +44 (0) 1274 777700; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201E-mail [email protected] more information about Emerald’s regional offices please go to http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/officesCustomer helpdesk :Tel +44 (0) 1274 785278; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201E-mail [email protected], subscription and missing claims enquiries:E-mail [email protected] +44 (0) 1274 777700; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201

Missing issue claims will be fulfilled if claimed within six months of date of despatch. Maximum of one claim per issue.

Hard copy print backsets, back volumes and back issues of volumes prior to the current and previous year can be ordered from Periodical Service Company. Tel +1 518 537 4700; E-mail [email protected] For further information go to www.periodicals.com/emerald.html

Reprints and permissions serviceFor reprint and permission options please see the abstract page of the specific article in question on the Emerald web site (www.emeraldinsight.com), and then click on the “Reprints and permissions” link. Or contact:E-mail [email protected] Publisher and Editors cannot be held responsible for errors or any consequences arising from the use of information contained in this journal; the views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Publisher and Editors, neither does the publication of advertisements constitute any endorsement by the Publisher and Editors of the products advertised.

No part of this journal may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the articles are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the articles’ suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use.

Emerald is a trading name of Emerald Publishing LimitedPrinted by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY

Certificate Number 1985ISO 14001

ISOQAR certified Management System,awarded to Emerald for adherence to Environmental standard ISO 14001:2004.

Smart and Sustainable Built Environmentis indexed, abstracted and ranked in:British LibraryCabell's Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Computer

Science – Business Information Systems, Economics & Finance and Management

Construction Management AbstractsEBSCOICONDA®CIBlibraryINSPECNorwegian Social Science Data Services (NDS)ScopusSummon

Smart and Sustainable Built Environment has been awarded the distinction of CIB Encouraged Journal by the International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB)

Guidelines for authors can be found at:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/sasbe.htm


Smart an

d Su

stainab

le B

uilt E

nviro

nm

en

tV

olu

me

7 Nu

mb

er 3

/4 2

018

em

erald

pu

blish

ing

.co

m

www.emeraldinsight.com/loi/sasbe

Volume 7 Number 3/4 2018ISSN 2046-6099

Volume 7 Number 3/4 2018



Number 3/4

225 Editorial advisory board

226 Operating energy demand of various residential building typologies in different European climatesBrian Cody, Wolfgang Loeschnig and Alexander Eberl

251 Criteria and barriers for the application of green building features in Hong KongJayantha Wadu Mesthrige and Ho Yuk Kwong

277 Tax increment financing in the UK and USA: its prospects for urban regeneration in NigeriaAlirat Olayinka Agboola, Timothy Oluwafemi Ayodele and Aderemi Olofa

293 Determination of urban sprawl’s indicators toward sustainable urban developmentMohammad Paydar and Enayatollah Rahimi
