Analyzing green building rating tools for healthcare buildings from the building user's perspective

被引:18
|
作者
Kim, Sumin [1 ]
Osmond, Paul [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ New S Wales, Fac Built Environm, Sydney, NSW, Australia
关键词
Green Star; Healthcare building; Human factors; Perception gap; User perspectives;
D O I
10.1177/1420326X13480223
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
The principles of sustainability in the healthcare building sector are perceived differently by different healthcare building user groups. Based on a cross-sectional survey of hospital patients, staff, visitors and members of the public, this study found that issues relating to transport and accessibility were perceived as "more significant'' by respondents compared to how they are currently weighted in the Australian Green Star-Healthcare building rating tool. Environmental impacts relating to emissions to air and water were also identified as "more significant'' by the healthcare building users than their Green Star weighting would suggest. Indoor environmental quality has been acknowledged as the highest priority in choosing a healthcare building by the survey respondents. It is also one of the two priority categories given in Green Star in terms of weighting, which suggests that the Green Star-Healthcare rating tool aligns well with healthcare building user perspectives on this particular measure, which is linked to faster recovery rates of hospital patients.
引用
收藏
页码:757 / 766
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] GREEN BUILDING RATING FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS - LESSONS LEARNED
    Zuo, Jian
    Xia, Bo
    Chen, Qing
    Pullen, Stephen
    Skitmore, Martin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GREEN BUILDING, 2016, 11 (02): : 131 - 146
  • [2] Evolution of sustainability in global green building rating tools
    Wen, Baohua
    Musa, Nurmaya
    Onn, Chiu Chuen
    Ramesh, S.
    Liang, Lihua
    Wang, Wei
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 259
  • [3] Analysis of Domestic and Overseas Green Building Rating Tools
    Lian, Fen
    Qin, Xuan
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 16TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ADVANCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND REAL ESTATE (CRIOCM2011), 2011, : 177 - 182
  • [4] Green Star and NABERS: Learning from the Australian Experience with Green Building Rating Tools
    Mitchell, Lily M.
    [J]. ENERGY EFFICIENT CITIES: ASSESSMENT TOOLS AND BENCHMARKING PRACTICES, 2010, : 113 - 150
  • [5] REVIEW ON GREEN BUILDING RATING TOOLS WORLDWIDE: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AUSTRALIA
    Illankoon, I. M. Chethana S.
    Tam, Vivian W. Y.
    Le, Khoa N.
    Tran, Cuong N. N.
    Ma, Mingxue
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 2019, 25 (08) : 831 - 847
  • [6] FRAMEWORK FOR UPDATING GREEN BUILDING RATING TOOLS FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
    Wen, Baohua
    Liang, Lihua
    Xu, Feng
    Yan, Jianwei
    Yan, Xiangqi
    Ramesh, S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GREEN BUILDING, 2022, 17 (04): : 41 - 77
  • [7] A Framework for Developing Green Building Rating Tools Based on Pakistan's Local Context
    Khan, Muhammad Afrasiab
    Wang, Cynthia Changxin
    Lee, Chyi Lin
    [J]. BUILDINGS, 2021, 11 (05)
  • [8] Key credit criteria among international green building rating tools
    Illankoon, I. M. Chethana S.
    Tam, Vivian W. Y.
    Le, Khoa N.
    Shen, Liyin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 164 : 209 - 220
  • [9] Environmental, Economic, and Social Parameters in International Green Building Rating Tools
    Illankoon, I. M. Chethana S.
    Tam, Vivian W. Y.
    Le, Khoa N.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND PRACTICE, 2017, 143 (02)
  • [10] A comprehensive review on passive design approaches in green building rating tools
    Chen, Xi
    Yang, Hongxing
    Lu, Lin
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2015, 50 : 1425 - 1436