Green Building Market Report 2014 PDF

GREEN
BUILDING
MARKET
REPORT
South East Asia
2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Executive Summary
Sustainable Product Leaders
WorldGreen Building Council:

Green Building - An unstoppable force
Green Building in South East Asia
Analysis by BCI Economics
Green Building Report for Australia/New Zealand Snapshot
Methodology
Disclaimer
BCI Economics Contacts
INTRODUCTION
Green building continues to gain momentum and the SE Asian region is enthusiastically getting on
board. Even though many of the countries in the region enjoy a wealth of energy resources both
renewable and non-renewable, the concern for environmental degradation, national energy security
and the world-wide need to do more with less have provided the motivation to adopt sustainability
principles in their construction practices.
The evidence from the World Green Building Council is most compelling in 2002, when the WGBC
was founded it had eight member nations, none of them from Asia. Today, of the 100member
nations, 18 of them are in the Asia Pacific region and they are reporting significant achievements.
The national Green Building Council of Indonesia (GBCI), for instance, recently reported that over 100
building managers had reached out to it in order to apply for green building certification. Also the
Hong Kong Green Building Council BEAM Plus rating system, established in 2010, now has more
than 550 building projects either rated or registered.
Furthermore, Singapore has committed to fostering the continuous evolution of green architecture
with attractive incentives and a comprehensive rating system for buildings. The outcome has been
the certification of 1,534 newly constructed and 215 existing buildings as green since 2005.
1 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

No wonder then that we at BCI Asia have a keen interest in the growing adoption of green building principles and practices by the building and construction industry
especially as we also share the commitment of the Green Building Councils to promote the progress of the industry to even higher standards ofsustainability.
In 2014 we take great pride in celebrating seven years of our FuturArc Prize for Green Building Design and five years of the Green LeadershipAwards!
Our last empirical study of attitudes toward and experiences with green building in the SE Asia region was in 2008 in conjunction with BCI Australia. It will
beinstructive to see how the industry has evolved over that time especially in view of the economic and commercial challenges presented by the Global
Financial Crisis. I should like to add that this year we have extended our survey and the Green Building report for Australia (available separately) also includes
New Zealand for the first time.
As has been the case with the previous surveys conducted by BCI Economics, our analysis encompasses owners, developers, architects and engineers, main
contractors andsubcontractors across Hong Kong and 5 countries in South East Asia.
So without further hesitation, BCI Asia is delighted to present its 2014 Green Building Report on South East Asia. It adds a further dimension to our substantial
complement of products and services providing our clients in the region a greater understanding of the local and regional construction markets.
Dr. Matthias Krups

Chairman & CEO
BCI Media Group PTY Ltd.
GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 2

Executive
Summary
During the period of March through May, 2014, BCI Asia received responses from 523 developers,
architects, engineers, main- and subcontractors across South East Asia to a questionnaire about
their views on and experiences with green building. The findings are summarized as follows:
Around 7 in 10 respondents across the region stated that they had been involved in some form
of green building during the period of 2008-2014.
46% of respondents said they had received official green building certification for one or more
of their construction projects. Of those, about a third stated that they had had their ventures
registered with Singapore-based Green Mark.
79% of those participating in the survey indicated they would be somewhat likely or very likely
to pursue certification from the beginning of their green building projects.
Overall, our respondents were moderately optimistic that their enterprises would grow because
of activity in the area of green building.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The three major reasons encouraging companies in South East Asia to become engaged in green building were as follows:
to help protect the environment and strive to alleviate the consequences of global warming
to achieve lower lifecycle costs and
to enhance the value and marketability of their projects.
In turn, the biggest hurdles to the adoption of green building in South East Asia were:
the additional costs of building materials

the extra time and expenditure required to investigate suitable materials and
the extra time and costs needed to undertake necessary training.
Regarding their familiarity with certification systems, survey participants afforded the highest rating to the Singapore Green Mark followed by Malaysias GBI.
79% of respondents indicated that they were somewhat or very likely to pursue certification in the future.
The top three certification systems of choice were Green Mark (Singapore), GBI (Malaysia) and LEED (US)
When asked which building categories were most likely to benefit from certification, our survey participants named the top 4 categories as commercial/office,
healthcare, hospitality and education, although there was little to choose between them.
The main obstacles to pursuing green building certification were considered to be:
the cost of the certification process,

the lack of information on certification requirements, and
the gap between design promises made with the certification and the performance reality when the building operates.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
44% of all Asian respondents indicated that they had seen some, even significant growth in their annual sales because of green building.
There is a premium to be paid for delivering a building according to green principles with only 4% of the Asian respondents claiming there was no cost
impact. However, the spread of values for the extra costs (reflecting the different levels of certification) still compares favourably with the expectations
reported in 2008.
In turn, the actual savings in operational costs also compare favourably with the expectations reported in the 2008 survey, with only 5% of respondents
reporting that green building had not had any impact, whereas over half claimed savings of 10% and more.
Although 6% of our respondents claimed they had not observed an improvement in building value, 12% advised their buildings were worth atleast 20%
more because of their green credentials. In all, just under a half of the responses put the increase in building value at a minimum of 10%.
Calculating the improvement attributable to green building of the Return on Investment (ROI) on their building projects proved difficult but the results from
those respondents who managed it confirmed a positive outcome with over 40% of our respondents reporting improvements of at least 10%.
We included a question regarding design software and our respondents advised they believed it had most relevance for:
prediction and evaluation of natural (solar) lighting

energy modelling/baseline analysis
evaluation and exploration of alternative building materials
The technologies most frequently used in green building projects in South East Asia comprised:
energy efficient/intelligent lighting

water efficient fixtures and fittings and
insulation products.

GREEN
Actionable analytics to drive
PRODUCT
business decisions, and share
sustainability initiatives
LEADERS
Occupant comfort and productivity
while achieving energy savings in
excess of 30% on HVAC and up to
60% on lighting
Learn m
HunterDouglas
Distech Controls, the Distech Controls logo and Innovative Solutions for Greener Buildings are tradema
FALL IN
LOVE WITH
Rose Gold
The charming allure of golds splendor meets the subtle blush of a
delicate pink rose. Our new Rose Gold faucet finish is a tease of timeless
luxury with a touch of romantic elegance.
Kohlerasiapacific.com
The Penang Second Bridge in Malaysia, the longest bridge in South East Asia,
was officially opened on 1 March 2014. The Bridge named after the 14th
Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Tuanku Abdul Halim Muadzam Shah of Kedah, was
assigned with the route number E28.
Totalling 24km in length, it will take motorists around 20 minutes to cross the
RM 4.5billion bridge from Batu Kawan on the mainland and Batu Maung on
the island.
Penang island already has another bridge linking it to the mainland. Thefirst
bridge opened in 1985 but the states rising population, and popularity
withvisitors, meant that another bridge was needed to cope with the increasing
traffic.
The Second Penang Bridge Plus Toll Plaza achieved CBI provisional rating
gold and TheSecond Penang Bridge PB2X Toll Plaza achieved GBI provisional
platinum.
An
unstoppable
force
Jane Henley,
Chief Executive
Officer World
Green Building Council
Green building has become an unstoppable force.
The latest World Green Building Trends report, released by McGraw-Hill Construction in conjunction
with the World Green Building Council (World GBC), surveyed professional services firms in more
than 60 countries, revealing that green building is accelerating around the world as it is recognised
as a long-term business opportunity.
Just over half of those firms surveyed - which include architects, engineers, contractors, owners
and consultants - anticipate that more than 60 per cent of their work will be green by 2015. This is
up from a quarter of firms in 2012.
The report finds that growth of green is not limited to one geographic region or economic state;
green building is pervasive, rather than isolated to a particular region, economic condition or culture.
Interestingly, when McGraw-Hill Construction published its 2008 study of the global green building
An unstoppable force
market, doing the right thing was the primary driver for green building.Today, green building is increasingly seen as a business opportunity, with client and
market demand and brand recognition the dominant forces.
The potential for design, construction, consulting, auditing and manufacturing companies across the entire value chain is immense which is why most
countries across the Asia Pacific now have a national GBC affiliated with the World GBC. The green building council model, which demonstrates why
collaboration between many can achieve greater results than leadership of a few, rests on the belief that effective solutions require a whole sector approach
across the entire supply chain.
When the World GBC was established in 2002, it had eight member nations, none of them from Asia. Today, we have 100 member nations, 18 of them in the
Asia Pacific region.
Established Emerging Prospective Associated Group
Green building council with full Green building council working A group that has been officially Groups that the World GBC endorses
membership status with World GBC towards full membership status recognised by the World GBC as and supports, as the organisations
with World GBC the entity establishing a GBC in their are in the process of forming
country, and is working towards councils in non-member countries
emerging member status or economic zones but which do not
yet satisfy the membership criteria
Australia Indonesia Sri Lanka Bangladesh

Hong Kong Malaysia Korea Brunei
India Pakistan China
Japan Philippines Kazakhstan
New Zealand Vietnam
Singapore
Chinese Taipei

A n un s t o p p able f o r c e
Of course, opportunities and challenges vary from country to country, and vast disparities exist in terms of technology adoption, public awareness and
government engagement. In some mature markets, GBCs have driven dramatic upticks in sustainability, have well-established relationships with governments
and are boosting green collar skills across their entire industry. They also have established rating systems which have stimulated market demand for buildings
with improved environmental performance, provided a common language for green building and promoted an integrated, holistic approach to building design.
Many countries in the Asian region are rich in energy resources - both in terms of renewable and non-renewable energy. However, driven by aconcern for
environmental degradation and national energy security, many countries are developing comprehensive plans to progressively increase the use of renewable
resources and enhance building energy performance.
These national plans are being supported by regulations, fiscal initiatives, market-based mechanisms and voluntary initiatives. Examples include building
codes, energy audit requirements, funding schemes, tax exemptions, and energy labelling for appliances.
At the same time, green building rating tools are being developed and tailored to address the unique physical and socio-economic characteristics of
each country. A number of countries have well-established rating systems from Green Mark in Singapore to Green Star in Australia and New Zealand.
The Hong Kong Green Building Council BEAM Plus rating system, established in 2010, now has more than 550 building projects either rated or registered.
The Indian Green Building Council has 540 functioning and rated green buildings, and 2,770 green building projects on the go, across the nations five climatic
zones. In Australia, 22 per cent of the nations office space is now Green Star certified.
Many organisations across the value chain are embracing sustainability as a long-term business opportunity. The World GBCs inaugural Asia Pacific Regional
Network Leadership Awards in Green Building received 55 nominations from companies across the region in 2014 (and a further 57 nominations of green
building projects). From that pool of companies, Singapores City Developments Limited and Keppel Land Limited, and Indias ITC Limited Hotels Division
were acknowledged for walking the talk when it comes to sustainability. They also underscore that designing and delivering a green building is just the
first step on the road to sustainability and that strong management engagement and commitment to embedding sustainability into organisational cultures
reaps rewards.

An unstoppable force
Financial incentives, which are very effective in promoting energy efficiency, are not widely available in Asia but this is beginning to change. Many countries
are yet to establish financing frameworks for energy efficiency and conservation projects, and financial institutions are still hesitant to finance green projects.
However, financial initiatives are emerging. Brunei, for example, has changed its tariff structure and introduced prepaid electricity meters to encourage users to
monitor their electricity consumption. Thailands Energy Efficiency Revolving Fund provides capital at no cost to Thai banks to fund energy efficiency projects,
while the Ministry of Industry provides subsidies for the implementation of energy conservation measures.
Creative campaigns are helping to raise awareness of energy efficiency and green building across the region. In the last few years, Vietnam has held a song
writing campaign to spread the word on the efficient use of resources. A TV program in the Philippines showcased the construction of eco-friendly homes, with
tips provided by experts. The Hong Kong Green Building Council launched the Hong Kong Green School Guide to provide practical guidelines for principals
and school administrators to better understand how to improve building energy efficiency and engage students.The Singapore GBC led Project Green Insights
which involved installing energy meters in schools and educating students on how to read the monitors and modify their behaviour. The enthusiasm of the
students has led the Singaporean Government to invest more in green building.
So, where to from here? Certainly, the scale, speed and development, the increasing scarcity and cost of energy, and the growing need for the world to do
more with less in Asia Pacific and the world over is likely to continue to accelerate the adoption of green building practices. In the future, sustainability will
be seen not as an add-on but a must-have. It will be self-evident that the upfront costs of green building will be worth the immense long-term benefits.

Outdoor &
indoor expert
Greenwall Wood Composite Decking Wood Composite Decking

Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited Hong Kong Science Park Jardine House, Central
Rattan furniture
The Latitude Greentins has years of experience in providing green, sustainable,
unique and lifestyling building materials and services to architectural,
design, building and construction professionals for residential, commercial,
hotel, landscaping and infrastructure projects. Our products include:
Recycled Wood Plastic Composite
Green Wall/Green Roof/Green Podium
Rattan Furniture
Bamboo Flooring
Laminated Glass
Tatami
Illuminated signs and displays
Units A&B, 31/F, E-Trade Plaza, 24 Lee Chung Street, Chai Wan, Hong Kong
and more
T: (852) 2866 2683 F: (852) 2528 9288 Email: info@greentins.com
Respondents profile
Subcontractor
5%
Owner/
developer
Main
22%
South East Asia

contractor,
builder
18%
Professional services:
architect, engineer,
The 2014 Green Building Report in the Asia-Pacific has been drawn from the answers to a detailed consultant
questionnaire from 523 respondents situated in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, 55%
the Philippines and Hong Kong. 55% of survey participants identified themselves as providers of
professional services, namely architects, engineers or consultants.
Participants represented companies of various sizes but largely from enterprises employing between
11-100 people.
Hong
Kong 101 and
3% more
Thailand Other 33%
5% 3%
1-10
Vietnam 26%
7%
Malaysia
26%
Singapore
18%
Indonesia
19%
Philippines 11-100
19% 41%

Green Building in
South East Asia south east asia
GREEN BUILDING ACTIVITY

More than 70% of the industry professionals that completed our questionnaire
confirmed that they had in some way been involved with green building in the
time period from 2008 to 2014. As can be seen from the comparison between
NO
the 2008 and 2014 results according to respondent type, there has been
asubstantial increase in the level of activity over that period. 28%
YES
72%

Green Building in south east asia
Owner/Developer Professional Services
100% 70% 100% 81%
41% 80%
50% 57%
60%
0% 40%
2008 2014 2008 2014
Contractors/Subcontractors
100%
60%
50% 25%
0%
2008 2014

indonesia
RESULTS BY COUNTRY
100%
80% 67%
One can observe that in most countries the share of respondents engaging
in green building has dramatically increased over the six years since 2008. 60% 38%
This is especially evident for Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong. However,
involvement in green building appears to have declined in the countries that
40%
previously headed this comparison, namely Thailand (dipping from 55% 20%
to 47%) and Vietnam (79% to 70%). No definitive explanations for these
reversals have been confirmed but we surmise that political unrest may have 0%
contributed to the lower figure inThailand. 2008 2014
HONG KONG malaysia
100% 83% 100% 83%

80% 80%
60% 45% 60% 30%
40% 40%
20% 20%
0% 0%
2008 2014 2008 2014

PHILIPPINES singapore
100% 100% 82%

71%
80% 80%
45% 45%
60% 60%
40% 40%
20% 20%
0% 0%
2008 2014 2008 2014
THAILAND VIETNAM
100% 100%
79%
80% 80% 70%
55%
60% 47% 60%
40% 40%
20% 20%
0% 0%
2008 2014 2008 2014

GREEN BUILDING
CERTIFICATION
Although 72% of our respondents claimed an involvement with green Comparison of the relative significance of green building certification
building, only 46% followed through to pursue official green building reveals substantial differences across the national markets from
certification. Thailand, where only 21% of respondents had pursued and achieved
certification for their projects to Hong Kong with a figure of 90%. This may
be taken to illustrate the divergent perceptions of the importance and
merit attached to certification between the individual countries.
NO YES
54% 46% BCA Green Mark
Others (Singapore)
24% 33%
For those survey participants that confirmed receipt of certification, the LEED
Singapore-based Green Mark was the most widely used system, with (US)
GBI
33% of all certificates obtained. 20%
(Malaysia)
The Malaysian GBI and the United States LEED systems were also 23%
reasonably well represented across the South East Asia Region.

G R E E N B U I L D I N G C E RT I F I C AT I O N
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Hong Kong 90%
Singapore 82%
Malaysia 60%
Vietnam 29%
Philippines 28%
Indonesia 24%
Thailand 21%

Meet the New Standard
in Sustainable Buildings
Let us show you how our innovative building automation and energy
management solutions can help you to acheive greater results.
Actionable analytics to drive Optimised energy efciency, and Increase employee productivity by
business decisions, and share reduced energy wastage up to 20% with appropriate ligh-
sustainability initiatives ting, up to 50% with appropriate
temperature settings, and up to
9% when provided control over
environmental settings
Occupant comfort and productivity Engage occupants for increased
while achieving energy savings in energy efciency by up to 15%
excess of 30% on HVAC and up to
60% on lighting
Learn more at www.distech-controls.com/GREEN
Distech Controls, the Distech Controls logo and Innovative Solutions for Greener Buildings are trademarks of Distech Controls Inc. Distech Controls Inc., 2014. all rights reserved.
Improving Solid Wastes Management with Automated Refuse Collection System
Improvements
suit architectural requirements of dierent projects
eliminate nega ve impacts of tradi onal waste handling methods
improve unfavourable working condi ons for cleaners
no need for temporary storage of waste in public areas
improve hygienic environment
reduce noise & odours
Technology of Automated Collection
waste is disposed through refuse disposal inlets
temporarily stored above the totally enclosed discharge valves (DV)
level sensors monitor refuse storage volume and ini ate the system to start collec on process if full
DV will be opened and stored refuses will drop into underground transport pipe net by gravity
air stream transports refuses at a speed of about 70 kmh to the central refuse collec on sta on
a r separa on with air, refuses will nally se le inside refuse container
air will be treated to remove odour and dust before discharging to the atomosphere
complete collec on process is monitored and controlled by electrical control centre and supervised by
Supervisory Control and Date Acquisi on System (SCADA)
Applications
residen al development
oce, shopping mall and commercial development
restaurant, food court, ight kitchen and food manufacturing facili es
hospital and laundry
theme park and exhibi on centre Taipei Financial Centre, Taiwan
Science Park, Hong Kong Tamar Government HQ Building, Hong Kong 301 Hospital, Beijing, China
Envac Far East Ltd. Tel : 852-28698838 envac.hk@envac.com.hk www.envacgroup.com

GROWTH
EXPECTATIONS no growth strong growth
FOR GREEN BUILDING (1) (4)
- BY BUILDING CATEGORY - Commercial/

Office
3.3
Education 3.2
Overall, there are no categories that clearly offer greater opportunities Multi Residential 3.2
for growth but on balance, commercial and office developments,
education and multi-residential would appear to be the preferred Healthcare 3.1
categories. At the other end of the scale, single residential, industrial
and retail projects were considered to have the least potential from a Hospitality 3.1
green building perspective.
Publicly funded/ 3.0
Community/Legal
Although on the overall chart the variations by category appear
gradual, this is because they are averages of wider variations between Single Residential 2.9
the countries.
Industrial 2.9
Whereas commercial and office developments lead the growth
expectations for Singapore and Malaysia, it is the education Retail 2.8
category that is regarded as having the most potential in Hong Kong,
Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam. In contrast, the respondents from
the Philippines rated residential (multi- and single-) as having the most
potential.

G R O W T H E X P E C TAT I O N S F O R G R E E N B U I L D I N G
hong kong indonesia
no growth strong growth no growth strong growth

(1) (4) (1) (4)
Education 3.4 Education 3.6
Hospitality 3.2 Hospitality 3.5

Publicly
3.2 Healthcare 3.4
funded/Community
Multi Residential 3.0 Commercial/Office 3.4
Commercial/Office 2.9 Multi Residential 3.4
Healthcare 2.8 Single Residential 3.3
Single Residential 2.4 Industrial 3.2

Publicly
Retail 2.3 funded/Community 3.2
Industrial 2.1 Retail 2.9

malaysia philippines

(1) (4) (1) (4)
Commercial/Office 3.2 Multi Residential 3.3
Multi Residential 3.1 Single Residential 3.3
Healthcare 2.9 Commercial/Office 3.2

Education 2.9 Education 3.2
Hospitality 2.9 Hospitality 3.1
Retail 2.8 Industrial 3.0

Publicly Healthcare
2.7 3.0
funded/Community
Publicly
Single Residential 2.6 funded/Community
2.9

singapore thailand

(1) (4) (1) (4)
Commercial/Office 3.4 Education 3.6
Education 3.2 Hospitality 3.5
Multi Residential 3.2 Healthcare 3.3

Publicly Commercial/Office 3.3
funded/Community
3.0
Hospitality 2.9 Industrial 3.3
Retail 2.8 Retail 3.2

Healthcare 2.7 Multi Residential 3.2
Industrial 2.7 Single Residential 3.0

Publicly
Single Residential 2.6 2.9
funded/Community

Vietnam
no growth strong growth

(1) (4)
Education 3.4
Hospitality 3.4
Healthcare 3.3
Commercial/Office 3.2
Retail 3.2
Industrial 3.1
Multi Residential 2.9
Single Residential 2.8

Publicly funded/
Community/Legal
2.7

AUTOMATIC DORMA Far East Country Offices:
Singapore Tel: 65 6268 7633
SLIDING DOOR Indonesia

Korea
Malaysia/Brunei
Tel: 62 21 293 0376-2
Tel: 82 31 776 0051
Tel: 603 7665 1683
ST FLEX GREEN Philippines

Taiwan
Tel: 632 893 4077-8
Tel: 886 2 2709 6611
Vietnam Tel: 84 8 62 888748

Thailand/Myanmar/ Tel: 66 2236 4994-6
Laos/Cambodia/
Energy efciency in an elegant design www.dorma.com.sg

Cassidy Elementary | Kalamazoo, Mich.
TAKE AIM AT GREAT STYLE

WITH BIG ASS FANS
does the same. With a variety of sizes, finishes and styles, Big Ass Fans blend form
and function to suit any space. Choose from our signature colors and wood grains, or
send us your favorite hue, and well build you a fan to match. Beyond good looks, Big
Ass Fans keep you comfortable so you can use less heating and air conditioning and
enjoy lower utility bills. Thats style and savings, right on target.
VISIT OUR SHOWROOM!

Visit bigassfans.hk or call +852 2836 5808 to schedule an appointment today.
Showroom: ROOM 808, TAI YAU BUILDING, 181 JOHNSTON RD, WAN CHAI, HONG KONG
REASONS FOR
INVOLVEMENT not important
(1)
very important
(4)
IN GREEN BUILDING Contribute to the protection

of our environment/reduce
global warming
3.6
Achieve lower lifecycle costs,
e.g. through energy efficiency
and productivity increases 3.6
It is pleasing to observe that the leading motive for
South East Asia construction professionals to engage in green Achieve increased building
value/marketability 3.2
building activity is out of regard for the environment as it was
in our previous survey in 2008. Reduction in the total lifecycle Benefit from positive publicity/be
seen as a good corporate citizen 3.2
costs again rated the second most important reason but has
Achieve higher return
narrowed the gap since the previous survey. However, the on investment 3.0
third ranked reason was an option not included in the 2008
Achieve higher sales by
survey namely, the enhanced end value and marketability of attracting and retaining green 3.0
the completed building. building clients
Requirement of
developer/owner 3.0
We are beginning to see that the feel-good factor is making
way for the commercial incentives to deliver environmentally Attract and retain talent
2.8
for my firm
sensitive and sustainable premises. The industry is recognising
the opportunity to profit from green building rather than in spite Win government tenders 2.5
of it. These sentiments appear to be held fairly consistently
across the respondent roles.
The ratings for the various reasons for getting involved in green
building do show slight variations between countries but generally
are reasonably consistent with the overall results.

R E A S O N S F O R I N V O LV E M E N T I N G R E E N B U I L D I N G
not important very important

(1) (4)
Achieve lower lifecycle costs,

HONG KONG
3.7
e.g. through energy efficiency 3.6
and productivity increases 3.5
Contribute to the protection
of our environment/reduce
3.5 not important very important
3.6
global warming 3.6 (1) (4)
Achieve increased building 3.2 Contribute to the protection of our
3.2 environment/reduce global warming 3.8
value/marketability 3.2
Achieve lower lifecycle costs, e.g. through
Benefit from positive publicity/be 3.2 energy efficiency and productivity increases 3.6
seen as a good corporate citizen 3.2 Benefit from positive publicity/be seen
3.1 3.5
as a good corporate citizen
Achieve higher sales by 3.1
attracting and retaining green 3.0 Requirement of developer/owner 3.0
building clients 3.1
3.0 Achieve increased building
Requirement of 2.8
developer/owner 3.0 value/marketability
3.2
Attract and retain talent for my firm 2.7
Achieve higher return 3.0
on investment 3.0 Achieve higher sales by attracting and
3.0 2.5
retaining green building clients
2.3
Win government tenders 2.4 Achieve higher return on investment 2.3
2.6
Win government tenders 2.3
Attract and retain talent 2.7
for my firm 2.8
2.9 Other 2.0
Owner/Developer Professional Services Contractor/Subcontractor

INDONESIA malaysia
not important very important not important very important
(1) (4) (1) (4)
Contribute to the protection of our Achieve lower lifecycle costs, e.g. through
environment/reduce global warming 3.8 energy efficiency and productivity increases 3.5
Achieve lower lifecycle costs, e.g. through Contribute to the protection of our
energy efficiency and productivity increases 3.8 environment/reduce global warming 3.4
Achieve increased building
Other 3.4 value/marketability 3.3
Benefit from positive publicity/be seen Benefit from positive publicity/be

as a good corporate citizen 3.2 seen as a good corporate citizen 3.2
Achieve higher sales by attracting and

Achieve higher return on investment 3.2 3.2
retaining green building clients 3.1 Achieve higher return on investment 3.1
Achieve increased building value/marketability 3.1 Requirement of developer/owner 3.0
Attract and retain talent for my firm 3.0 Attract and retain talent for my firm 2.7
Requirement of developer/owner 2.9 Win government tenders 2.4
Win government tenders 2.2 Other 2.4

PHILIPPINES SINGAPORE
(1) (4) (1) (4)
Contribute to the protection of our Achieve lower lifecycle costs, e.g. through
environment/reduce global warming 3.8 energy efficiency and productivity increases 3.5
Achieve lower lifecycle costs, e.g. through Contribute to the protection of our
energy efficiency and productivity increases 3.7 environment/reduce global warming 3.4
Achieve increased building Achieve increased building

value/marketability 3.3 value/marketability 3.1
Benefit from positive publicity/be seen Benefit from positive publicity/be
as a good corporate citizen 3.2 seen as a good corporate citizen 3.1
Other 3.2 Requirement of developer/owner 3.1

retaining green building clients 3.2 Achieve higher return on investment 3.0
Achieve higher return on investment 3.2 Win government tenders 2.9
Requirement of developer/owner Achieve higher sales by attracting and

3.1 2.8
Attract and retain talent for my firm 2.9 Other 2.7
Win government tenders 2.4 Attract and retain talent for my firm 2.5

thailand VIETNAM
(1) (4) (1) (4)
Contribute to the protection of our Contribute to the protection of our
environment/reduce global warming 3.7 environment/reduce global warming 3.7
Benefit from positive publicity/be seen as a Achieve increased building value/
good corporate citizen 3.4 marketability 3.5
Achieve lower lifecycle costs, e.g. through Benefit from positive publicity/be seen
energy efficiency and productivity increases 3.4 as a good corporate citizen 3.4
Achieve higher sales by attracting and Achieve lower lifecycle costs, e.g. through
3.4 3.3
retaining green building clients energy efficiency and productivity increases
Achieve increased building value/ Achieve higher sales by attracting and
3.3 3.1
marketability retaining green building clients
Requirement of developer/owner 3.2 Requirement of developer/owner 3.0
Achieve higher return on investment 3.1 Attract and retain talent for my firm 3.0
Attract and retain talent for my firm 2.9 Achieve higher return on investment 2.8
Win government tenders 2.6 Other 2.5
Other Win government tenders 2.4

REASONS AGAINST
(1) (4)
Higher costs of 3.1
INVOLVEMENT IN
building materials
Additional time and

costs for additional training 2.8
GREEN BUILDING Additional time and

cost to research materials 2.7
Additional time and

2.7
Having surveyed the reasons for becoming involved in green cost of documentation
building, we next turned our attention to the obstacles getting in

Additional time
the way. We found the higher costs of building materials cited as needed at design stage 2.6
the primary reason, followed by the additional time and cost to
research materials and the time and costs for additional training not important very important
in second and third place, respectively. (1) (4)
This overall pattern was largely reflected in the responses by 3.3

Higher costs of
respondent role although owners and developers were particularly building materials 3.1
3.0
sensitive to the extra materials costs and contractors showed
concern for the costs attributable to training in green building Additional time and
2.9
2.7
techniques. cost to research materials 2.9
2.7
Consistent with our summary findings, the higher costs of Additional time and 2.7
cost for additional training 2.9
building materials were also found to be the major obstacle to
green building implementation across most national markets. 2.8
Additional time and
The additional time and cost to research materials also ranked cost of documentation
2.6
2.9
second in numerous countries while the additional time and costs
for additional training came in third for several markets aswell. 2.6
Additional time needed 2.5
atdesign stage
2.7

R E A S O N S A G A I N S T I N V O LV E M E N T I N G R E E N B U I L D I N G
hong kONG INDONESIA

(1) (4) (1) (4)
Higher costs of 3.09 Higher costs of 2.8

building materials building materials
Additional time and Additional time and

costs for additional training 2.9 cost to research materials 2.74

cost to research materials 2.5 costs for additional training 2.66

cost of documentation 2.5 cost of documentation 2.5
Additional time Additional time

needed at design stage 2.3 needed at design stage 2.5

MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES

(1) (4) (1) (4)
Higher costs of 2.8 Higher costs of 3.18

building materials building materials

cost to research materials 2.74 cost to research materials 2.9

costs for additional training 2.66 costs for additional training 2.87

cost of documentation 2.5 cost of documentation 2.68
Additional time Additional time

needed at design stage 2.5 needed at design stage 2.61

SINGAPORE THAILAND

(1) (4) (1) (4)
Higher costs of 3.23 Higher costs of building materials 3.2

building materials
Additional time and Additional time and costs for

costs for additional training 2.77 3.0
additional training
Additional time and Additional time and cost to

cost of documentation 2.75 research materials 2.9
Additional time and Additional time and cost of

cost to research materials 2.71 documentation 2.9
Additional time Additional time needed at

needed at design stage 2.59 design stage 2.7

vietnam

(1) (4)
Higher costs of 3.2

building materials
Additional time and

costs for additional training 2.4
Additional time and

cost to research materials 2.3
Additional time and

cost of documentation 2.1
Additional time
needed at design stage 2.1

ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY
CONSULTING
W www.greenaconsultants.com in GreenA Consultants
GreenA
Green building
Environmental Green Knowledge
Consultants
certification - LEED, Development of Management Centre
studies Green Material
Green Mark , Green green building for Research and Green Branding
CFD, Daylight Advisory
Building Index, Green councils and Green
Reflectance , Energy Corporate Sustain-
Reporting Initiative-GRI Certification
Modelling ability Training
& Green Globe
FAMILIARITY WITH
CERTIFICATION SYSTEMS
dont know expert knowledge
(1) (4)
Green Mark (Singapore) 2.7
The responses to the question how familiar are you with the Green Star (New Zealand) 2.6
following certification systems (relevant to the South East Asia
region) were naturally consistent with the answers to the earlier LEED (US) 2.3
question which certification systems have you used. Across
the region, the Singapore Green Mark had the highest rating BREAAM (UK) 2.1
with Malaysias GBI just a little further back. Their high ratings
CGBC (Canada) 2.0
are not surprising given their countries level of involvement
with green building although we might have expected that 1.8
BERDE (Philippines)
Hong Kongs BEAM system would have rated more highly.
Greenship (Indonesia) 1.8
Mention should also be made of the international systems,
the US LEED, the UK BREEAM and the Australian Green Star BEAM Plus (Hong Kong) 1.8
which all had high levels of awareness across the region.
CGBC (Canada) 1.7
Naturally, each country favoured their locally based agency.

Lotus (Vietnam) 1.6
However, the US LEED system and Singapores Green Mark
frequently took the second and third places behind them
TREES (Thailand) 1.6
suggesting that they may be the benchmarks in the region for
good green building practice.

f a m ili a rit y with certi f ic a tion s y ste m s
hong kong Indonesia

dont know expert knowledge dont know expert knowledge
(1) (4) (1) (4)
BEAM Plus (Hongkong) 3.8 Greenship (Indonesia) 2.7
LEED (US) 2.9 Green Mark (Singapore) 2.2
Green Mark (Singapore) 2.1 LEED (US) 2.1
Green Star (Australia) 2.1 Green Star (Australia) 1.9
BREAAM (UK) 2.0 BREAAM (UK) 1.8
CGBC (Canada) 1.7 GBI (Malaysisa) 1.8
BERDE (Philippines) 1.4 BEAM Plus (Hong Kong) 1.6
Lotus (Vietnam) 1.4 TREES (Thailand) 1.6
Greenship (Indonesia) 1.3 CGBC (Canada) 1.6
GBI (Malaysisa) 1.3 BERDE (Philippines) 1.6
TREES (Thailand) 1.3 Lotus (Vietnam) 1.5
Others 1.0 Others 1.3

MALAYSIA philippines
(1) (4) (1) (4)
GBI (Malaysisa) 3.7 Green Star (Australia) 3.3
Green Mark (Singapore) 2.9 LEED (US) 3.1
LEED (US) 2.6 Green Star (Australia) 2.2
BREAAM (UK) 2.3 Green Mark (Singapore) 2.2
Green Star (Australia) 1.9 BREAAM (UK) 2.1
Others 1.9 CGBC (Canada) 1.9
BEAM Plus (Hongkong) 1.6 Others 1.9
Greenship (Indonesia) 1.6 BEAM Plus (Hongkong) 1.8
CGBC (Canada) 1.5 Greenship (Indonesia) 1.7
TREES (Thailand) 1.5 GBI (Malaysisa) 1.7
Lotus (Vietnam) 1.4 TREES (Thailand) 1.6
BERDE (Philippines) 1.4 Lotus (Vietnam) 1.5

Singapore Thailand
(1) (4) (1) (4)
Green Mark (Singapore) 3.8 TREES (Thailand) 2.6
LEED (US) 2.5 Green Mark (Singapore) 2.6
GBI (Malaysisa) 2.0 LEED (US) 2.5
BREAAM (UK) 1.9 BEAM Plus (Hong Kong) 2.1
Green Star (Australia) 1.8 Lotus (Vietnam) 2.1
BEAM Plus (Hongkong) 1.7 Greenship (Indonesia) 1.9
CGBC (Canada) 1.6 BREAAM (UK) 1.9
Greenship (Indonesia) 1.5 GBI (Malaysisa) 1.9
Lotus (Vietnam) 1.5 Green Star (Australia) 1.9
BERDE (Philippines) 1.4 BERDE (Philippines) 1.8
TREES (Thailand) 1.4 CGBC (Canada) 1.7
Others 1.3 Others 1.7

Vietnam
dont know expert knowledge
(1) (4)
Lotus (Vietnam) 3.5
LEED (US) 3.0
Green Mark (Singapore) 2.6
Green Star (Australia) 2.4
Others 2.4
BREAAM (UK) 2.3
BEAM Plus (Hong Kong) 2.0
CGBC (Canada) 1.8
GBI (Malaysisa) 1.8
BERDE (Philippines) 1.7
TREES (Thailand) 1.6
Greenship (Indonesia) 1.6

THE INTENTION OF SEEKING
GREEN BUILDING CERTIFICATION
Although less than half the respondents had indicated that they had pursued The results country by country were somewhat predictable. In Singapore,
certification, a substantial 79% indicated that they were somewhat or very Vietnam and Hong Kong, on the one hand, 92%, 91% and even the full
likely to pursue certification in the future. Of course, not every intention is 100% of respondents, respectively, stated that they were very or somewhat
followed through to implementation but this is a healthy leading indicator of likely to strive after green building certification. On the other hand, Indonesia,
growth in green building certification. Thailand and the Philippines appear to be still in catch-up mode. However
the shares of respondents with declared intentions at 75%, 69% and 72%
Not seeking for respectively still compare very favourably with their past actual performance
Very unlikely certification, (between 21% and 28%).
3% but sticking
= to Green Building
standards 9%
Somewhat hong kong

unlikely
9% Very
likely
41% Very likely
Somewhat likely
Somewhat
likely 42% Somewhat unlikely
58%
38%

T H E I N T E N T I O N O F S E E K I N G G R E E N B U I L D I N G C E RT I F I C AT I O N
indonesia Malaysia
9%
4% Very likely
Very likely
18%
87% 42% Somewhat likely
31% Somewhat likely
7% Somewhat unlikely
Somewhat unlikely
Very unlikely
Very unlikely
37%
44% Not seeking for certification,
but sticking to Green Building
standards

Philippines singapore
2%
3% 6%
10% Very likely Very likely
30% Somewhat likely Somewhat likely

15%
Somewhat unlikely 25% Somewhat unlikely
67%
Very unlikely Very unlikely
42% Not seeking for
certification, but
sticking to Green
Building standards

Thailand vietnam
5%
3% 6% Very likely
Very likely
27% Somewhat likely
Somewhat likely
26% 50% Somewhat unlikely
Somewhat unlikely 41%
Very unlikely
Very unlikely
42%
Not seeking for certification,
but sticking to Green Building
standards

PREFERRED GREEN BUILDING
CERTIFICATION 0% 20% 40%
Green Mark (Singapore) 40%

We have asked about familiarity with the various systems but
here we have asked bluntly of those respondents who have
GBI (Malaysia) 29%
indicated they are prepared to pursue green building certification,
which one will they choose? Not surprisingly, the respondents
tended to go with the systems with which they are familiar LEED (US) 28%
and accordingly, the three top choices were Green Mark

(Singapore), GBI(Malaysia) and LEED (US). Greenship (Indonesia) 17%
Naturally enough, preference went to the system administered BERDE (Philippines) 15%
by the countrys own agency. However, it becomes clear the
LEED system of the US and the Green Mark from Singapore are Lotus (Vietnam) 8%
the most important back-up choices.
Green Star (Australia) 7%
BEAM Plus (Hong Kong) 5%
BREEAM (UK) 4%
TREES (Thailand) 3%

P R E F E R R E D G R E E N B U I L D I N G C E RT I F I C AT I O N
HONG KONG INDONESIA
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Greenship (Indonesia) 80%

BEAM Plus
(Hong Kong) 92% Green Mark (Singapore) 30%
LEED (US) 17%

LEED (US) 42%
GBI (Malaysia) 3%
Green Mark
(Singapore) 8% TREES (Thailand) 3%
CGBC (Canada) 3%
BREEAM (UK) 3%
BERDE
8%
(Philippines) BERDE (Philippines) 2%
Lotus (Vietnam) 2%

philippines malaysia
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
BERDE (Philippines) 84% GBI (Malaysia) 92%
LEED (US) 55% Green Mark (Singapore) 32%
Green Mark (Singapore) 9% 16%

LEED (US) 18%
Green Star (Australia) 11% BREEAM (UK) 7%
GBI (Malaysia) 4% Others 4%

TREES (Thailand) 2%
1%
Green Star (Australia)
BREEAM (UK) 2%

singapore THAILAND
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Green Mark (Singapore) 97% TREES (Thailand) 50%

LEED (US) 65%
LEED (US) 33%


BERDE (Philippines) 3% 8%
Lotus (Vietnam)
Greenship (Indonesia) 3% Green Star (Australia) 8%
BREEAM (UK) 8%
GBI (Malaysia) 3%
CGBC (Canada) 3%

VIETNAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Lotus (Vietnam) 84%
LEED (US) 65%
BERDE (Philippines) 3%
GBI (Malaysia) 3%
CGBC (Canada) 3%
BREEAM (UK) 3%
Others 3%

PERCEIVED USEFULNESS
OF CERTIFICATION BY completely
useless
completely
useful
BUILDING CATEGORY (1) (4)
We wished to determine whether the industry

professionals regarded certification as being more Healthcare 3.6
useful for certain building categories than others. Across
Hospitality 3.6
South East Asia there appears little to choose between the
top 4 categories, namely commercial/office, healthcare,
Education 3.6
hospitality and education.
Public funded/ 3.4
Not that far behind come publicly funded projects Community/Legal
(including community and legal), multi residential and Multi Residential 3.4
industrial. However, certification does not appear to
be regarded as valuable for retail and single residential Industrial 3.3
developments.
Retail 3.2
The profiles for each country do bear some similarity with
the overall picture, however, there are some interesting Single Residential 3.0
variations reflecting differences in market opportunities.

P E R C E I V E D U S E F U L N E S S O F C E R T I F I C A T I O N BY B U I L D I N G C A T E G O R Y
hong kong INDONESIA
completely completely completely completely

useless useful useless useful
(1) (4) (1) (4)
Education 3.5 Hospitality 3.8
Hospitality 3.4 Healthcare 3.8
Public funded/
Community/Legal 3.4 Education 3.7
Commercial/Office 3.3 Commercial/Office 3.6
Healthcare 3.3 Induastrial 3.5
Single Residential 3.2 Multi Residential 3.5
Public funded/
Multi Residential 3.2 3.5
Community/Legal
Retail 3.0 Single Residential 3.3


(1) (4) (1) (4)
Commercial/Office 3.5 Commercial/Office 3.6
Healthcare 3.4 Education 3.6
Hospitality 3.4 Healthcare 3.5
Education 3.2 Industrial 3.5
Public funded/ 3.2 3.4

Hospitality
Community/Legal
Multi Residential 3.1 Multi Residential 3.4
Public funded/
Retail 3.1 3.4
Community/Legal
Industrial 3.0 Single Residential 3.2
Single Residential 2.8 Retail 3.1

singapore thailand

(1) (4) (1) (4)
Commercial/Office 3.6 Education 3.7
Healthcare 3.5 Hospitality 3.6
Education 3.5 Healthcare 3.5
Public funded/
3.4 Industrial 3.4
Community/Legal
Hospitality 3.4 Commercial/Office 3.4
Retail 3.3 Retail 3.3
Multi Residential 3.3 Multi Residential 3.2
Public funded/
Industrial 3.2 Community/Legal 3.2
Single Residential 2.7 Single Residential 3.0

vietnam
completely completely
useless useful
(1) (4)
Education 3.8
Healthcare 3.7
Industrial 3.6
Hospitality 3.5
Public funded/
Community/Legal 3.4
Multi Residential 3.4
Retail 3.2
Single Residential 2.9

THE MAIN REASONS
FOR NOT SEEKING
CERTIFICATION 0% 20% 40% 60% 70%
Cost of certification process 51%
The sheer upfront cost is clearly the favourite reason for not seeking
certification. Having considered the benefits and opportunities Lacking information on
38%
certification requirements
afforded by achieving certification, we now need to address the
obstacles to making the commitment. Clearly our respondents Gap between design promises and the
performance reality 37%
have demonstrated strong intentions for having their projects
accredited but the level of action has fallen far short.
Difficulty of certification process 35%
Overall, the leading objection by a sizeable margin and cited by just
over half the respondents to our South East Asia survey, is the cost Time of certification process 33%
of the certification process.
The second most frequently mentioned reason is the lack of Staff time required 32%
knowledge as to what is required to obtain certification and a close
third place was taken by the sense that design promises espoused Requirements too high 28%
in the certification process do not match the performance reality
when the building is operational. Lacking credit being given to certification
27%
by our clients
Bunched fairly close behind are the objections because of the
difficulty of the certification procedures, the length of time the
process requires and the amount of staff time that needs to be
dedicated. Although the major objection overall, certification costs were not top of every
countrys list. In Indonesia the main obstacle elicited by our survey was the
A small but significant number of respondents felt that the certification lack of information regarding what the certification process required. The
requirements were too demanding and a similar number reckoned respondents in Thailand mostly referred to the difficulty of the certification
that their clients did not place much value on having their buildings
process, whereas in Vietnam, the main objection was that there was a gap
certified.
between design promises and actual building performance.

T H E MA I N R E A S O N S F O R N O T S E E K I N G C E R T I F I C A T I O N
hong kong indonesia
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Cost of certification Lacking information on

50% 59%
process certification requirements
Time of certification process 33% Cost of certification process 49%
Difficulty of
certification process 33% Time of certification process 37%
Gap between design promises

and the performance reality 33% Staff time required 32%
Difficulty of
Requirements too high 33% certification process 32%
Gap between design promises

Staff time required 25% 32%
and the performance reality
Lacking information on Requirements too high 24%
25%
Lacking credit being given to Lacking credit being given to
certification by our clients 25% certification by our clients 6%

malaysia PHILIPPINES
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Cost of certification Cost of certification

54% 61%
process process
Gap between design
promises and the Difficulty of certification
44% 53%
performance reality process
Lacking information on
Time of 31% Time of certification 44%

certification process process
Difficulty of 30% Requirements too high 41%
certification process
Lacking information on Lacking credit being given to
29% 37%
certification requirements certification by our clients
Requirements too high Gap between design promises

27% 36%
and the performance reality
Lacking credit being given to
certification by our clients 7% Staff time required 34%

SINGAPORE THAILAND
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Cost of certification Difficulty of

55% certification process 58%
process
Gap between design
promises and the 35% Staff time required 37%
performance reality
Gap between design
Difficulty of
32% promises and the 32%
performance reality
Time of
27% Requirements too high 26%
Lacking credit being given to
23% Cost of certification process 21%
certification by our clients
Requirements too high 23% Time of certification process 21%
Lacking information on Lacking credit being given to

9% certification by our clients 21%

vietnam
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Gap between design
promises and the 35%
performance reality
Cost of certification process 32%
Difficulty of
certification process 29%
certification requirements 29%
Lacking credit being
given to certification by 26%
our clients
Staff time required 23%
Time of certification process 19%
Requirements too high 16%

SALES GROWTH Significant
0% 10% 20%
11%
30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ATTRIBUTABLE TO Some 33%
GREEN BUILDING Little 28%
As mentioned above, there is a growing awareness of the commercial None 15%

benefits of adopting green building principles. Our survey enquired
whether this had translated into additional revenue for those companies 13%
Dont Know
getting involved.
Only 15% reported that there had not been any sales growth (with a 2014
further 13% who could not say). A little bit of growth was noticed by
28% whereas 34% of respondents claimed some measurable growth
with a further 10% who reported the sales growth attributable to green 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
building to be significant
16%
Significant 9%
7%
Analysing the results by respondent type, owners and developers
35%
appeared to have the highest percentage of significant growth with Some 33%
contractors and subcontractors notably less fortunate. 32%
23%
Little 33%
29%
14%
None 11%
20%

S A L E S G R O W T H A T T R I B U T AB L E T O G R E E N B U I L D I N G
HONG KONG indonesia
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Significant 8% Significant 15%

14% 56%
Some 42% Some 35%

24% 14%
8% 33%
Little Little
38% 15%
25% 9%
None None
5% 21%
17% 8%
Dont Know Dont Know
19% 12%
Hong Kong 2014 Hong Kong 2008 Indonesia 2014 Indonesia 2008

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

53% 36%
Some 36% Some 32%

27% 29%
30% 35%
Little Little
43% 16%
14% 14%
None None
5% 3%
12% 8%
Dont Know Dont Know
11% 15%
Malaysia 2014 Malaysia 2008 Philippines 2014 Philippines 2008

singapore Thailand
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

18% 10%
Some 35% Some 17%

17% 24%
19% 34%
Little Little
33% 60%
18% 5%
None None
5% 0%
12% 26%
Dont Know Dont Know
11% 6%
Singapore 2014 Singapore 2008 Thailand 2014 Thailand 2008

vietnam
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Significant 11%
41%
Some 35%
12%
23%
Little
41%
9%
None
2%
22%
Dont Know
4%
Vietnam 2014 Vietnam 2008

ADDITIONAL UPFRONT BUILDING 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
COSTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO 20% or more 17%

27%
GREEN BUILDING 15% to less than 20%

17%
21%
20%
10% to less than 15%
14%
13%
It has always been taken for granted that green building would involve 5% to less than 10%
9%
additional building costs. It has also been frequently cited that the extra Less than 5% 10%
4%
expense was a major factor inhibiting the uptake of green building design
principles. In 2008, our survey reported on what the industry professionals No impact
1%
4%
thought the extra cost might be but in 2014 we asked what their actual 16%
Dont Know 27%
experience was which gives us the opportunity to compare the reality with
the expectation. 2014 2008
An interesting observation is that in 2008, 27% of respondents could not

provide an estimate of the additional costs whereas in 2014, the Dont 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Know response was only 16%, affording us reasonable confidence in the
16%
reliability of our data. 20% or more 20%
14%
26%
21%
It is clear that there is a premium to be paid for delivering a building 15% to less than 20% 24%
according to green principles with only 4% claiming there was no cost 19%
21%
10% to less than 15% 18%
impact. However, there is a spread of values for the extra costs reflecting 19%
12%
the different levels of certification. At the top end, 17% of the projects 5% to less than 10% 13%
incurred at least 20% of additional costs. Another 20% of the estimates put 7%
10%
Less than 5% 14%
the incremental cost at between 15% and 20% with 20% more between
0%
10% and 15%. No impact 1%
8%
13%
Dont Know 16%
This compares favourably with the expectations reported in 2008 where 13%
the percentage believing that costs would be in excess of 20% was up to Owner/Developer Professional Services Contractor/Subcontractor
27%. Yes, there is a premium for building green, but the price tag is not as
scary as it was thought to be.

A D D I T I O N A L U P F R O N T B U I L D I N G C O S T S A T T R I B U T AB L E T O G R E E N B U I L D I N G
hong kong indonesia

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 8% 20% or more 17%
15% to less than 20% 8% 15% to less than 20% 21%
Less than 5% 17% Less than 5% 7%
No impact 0% No impact 4%
Dont Know 8% Dont Know 14%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 15% 20% or more 28%

SINGAPORE THAILAND
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 17% 20% or more 16%

VIETNAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 3%
13%
5% to less than 10%
16%
Less than 5%
No impact 3%
Dont Know 16%

SAVINGS IN OPERATING 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
COSTS ATTRIBUTABLE 20% or more 16%

22%
TO GREEN BUILDING 15% to less than 20%

15%
13%

15%
As mentioned above, a major commercial motive for embracing 5% to less than 10% 11%
13%
green building principles has been the belief that these would lead
8%
to significant savings in operating costs, in particular, the lower Less than 5% 8%
consumption of energy and water. Notably, in this years survey we No impact

5%
3%
enquired as to the actual savings that had been experienced whereas
23%
in 2008 we could only ask about the outcomes expected by the Dont Know 28%
industry professionals.
2014 Actuality 2008 Belief
Although our conclusions are somewhat dampened by a degree
of uncertainty (we registered a Dont Know result of 23%) they 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
are nevertheless very encouraging. Only 5% of respondents had
17%
apparently not observed any impact, whereas over half claimed 20% or more
15%
19%
savings of 10% and more. 15% to less than 20%

17%
16%
10%
26%
The comparison with the expectations we recorded in our 2008 survey 10% to less than 15% 18%
20%
is quite favourable. As might be expected, the earlier results displayed 11%
a degree of optimism, hence a higher percentage of respondents 13%
9%
(22%) anticipated savings of at least 20%. The distribution of actual Less than 5% 7%
12%
results may show a slight downwards shift but the share of respondents 0%
No impact 4%
reporting savings of 10% and over has been maintained. 10%
21%
Dont Know 23%
20%

S AV I N G S I N O P E R A T I N G C O S T S A T T R I B U T AB L E T O G R E E N B U I L D I N G
hong kong indonesia

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 17% 20% or more 16%

SINGAPORE THAILAND
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 10% 20% or more 27%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 20% 20% or more 15%

VIETNAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 27%
Less than 5% 3%
No impact 0%
Dont Know 27%

REDWOOD MAKES EVERY SYSTEM SMARTER
Optimise space and energy usage with an intelligent sensor network
Find out more with this case study and learn how one of
the highest ranked software companies in the Dow Jones
Sustainability Index used Redwood to help them achieve up to
75 percent in energy cost savings and other benefits over their
previous system.
2014 CommScope, Inc. All rights reserved

www.commscope.com
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
INCREASE IN BUILDING 20% or more 12%

17%
VALUE ATTRIBUTABLE TO 15% to less than 20%

12%
18%
GREEN BUILDING
19%

8%
Less than 5% 10%

The second ranked commercial motivation for developing a 4%
building to green standards was found to be the increase in value No impact

2%
6%
of the end product and naturally we wanted to know the extent to 25%
Dont Know
which this was realised. Again we should acknowledge a degree 31%
of uncertainty (25% of respondents were unable to provide any

2014 Actuality 2008 Expectations
estimate) but the outcome does look to be very positive. Although
6% of the industry professionals we surveyed claimed there had
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
not been any impact on the building value, 12% advised their
buildings were worth at least 20% more because of their green 14%
20% or more 11%
credentials. In all, just under a half of the responses put the 11%
21%
increase in building value at a minimum of 10%. 15% to less than 20% 18%
19%
18%
2008 results were Expectations may have proved somewhat 19%
over optimistic but the reality check we have conducted in 2014 5% to less than 10%
11%
14%
13%
is far from disappointing.
9%
Less than 5% 9%
9%
7%
No impact 4%
10%
21%
Dont Know 25%
19%

I N C R E A S E I N B U I L D I N G VA L U E A T T R I B U T AB L E T O G R E E N B U I L D I N G
hong kong indonesia

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

SINGAPORE THAILAND
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

VIETNAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
20% or more 17%
Less than 5% 13%
No impact 0%
Dont Know 37%

INCREASE IN RETURN 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
ON INVESTMENT (ROI) 20% or more 7%

17%
ATTRIBUTABLE TO 15% to less than 20%

11%
15%
GREEN BUILDING 10% to less than 15% 19%

13%

10%
Less than 5% 9%
7%
The extent by which green building has enhanced the ROI
7%
of their building projects is clearly not easy to calculate with No impact
3%
31% of our respondents unable to provide us with an answer. Dont Know 31%
39%
Nevertheless, this degree of uncertainty (slightly better than
the figure of 39% encountered back in 2008) is not severe 2014 Actuality 2008 Expectations
enough to detract from our confidence in reporting a positive 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
outcome with over 40% of our respondents reporting 10%

20% or more 9%
improvements of at least 10%. 5%
20%
18%
As with the previous two survey topics, the industrys 10% to less than 15%
14%
21%
18%
optimism may have been tempered in the light of experience
13%
14%
but was by no means ill-founded. 5% to less than 10%
10%
10%
Less than 5% 8%
11%
10%
No impact 9%
16%
22%
Dont Know 26%
23%

I N C R E A S E I N R E T U R N O N I N V E S T M E N T ( R O I ) A T T R I B U T AB L E T O G R E E N B U I L D I N G
hong kong indonesia

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

SINGAPORE THAILAND
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

VIETNAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
20% or more 10%
Less than 5% 10%
No impact 7%
Dont Know 40%

With clients in numerous locations, operating in
differing environments, Fugro is best able
to meet their needs through a decentralized
and client oriented organizational structure,
offering a broad scope of services in a variety
of operating environments and conditions,
delivered from a global network of offices and
facilities. Our clients include many Government
departments, private developers, architects
and planners, utility companies, oil and gas
companies, contractors and other consulting
engineering firms.
Fugros sustainable building design team has
FUGRO BUILDING THE FUTURE

extensive experience in carrying out work in the
following key areas:
Green Building Consultancy and Certification

Low Carbon Building Design
Sustainable Building Services Consultancy
Air Quality Monitoring and Management
Carbon and Energy Management
Corporate Sustainability
Fugro (Hong Kong) Limited

7/F., Guardian House, 32 Oi Kwan Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong Fugro also provides other environmental
Tel: +852 2577 9023 consultancy services to support building and
Fax: +852 2895 2379 / 2895 3499 infrastructure developments. For details, please
Email: mcl@fugro.com.hk visit our website: www.fugro.com
(1) (4)
THE IMPORTANCE OF DESIGN Predict and evaluate

natural (solar) heating 3.1
SOFTWARE TO OPTIMISE Predict and evaluate
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
natural (solar) heating 3.1
Energy modelling/
baseline 3.0
Given the development advances in computer aided design (CAD) and building Predict and evaluate
natural ventilation 2.9
information modelling (BIM) software, these digital tools have achieved wide
Evaluate and explore
acceptance within the South East Asian construction industries. Therefore, we alternative building 2.9
wanted to investigate in which ways they are contributing to the adoption and
integration of green building principles. Predict and evaluate
HVAC operating costs 2.9
We posed the question how important is the use of design software to Specify material
quantities 2.8
optimize the environmental performance of your projects? and nominated
seven key tasks to be rated from 1 (not important) to 4 (very important). Atthe
end of the day, there was little to choose between those tasks in terms of the
benefit to be derived from using design software, although, overall in South
East Asia, prediction and evaluation of natural (solar) lighting and energy
modelling (baseline analysis) were the two areas benefitting the most from the
digital tools available.
The overall results are instructive but represent the averaging across the
countries in the region with their individual preferences. There are some
similarities between the profiles for each country, however, the differences
are instructive as they represent the local influences of the various climactic
conditions, the relative costs of power, water and other resources and,
tosome extent, product availability.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Energy efficient/ 68%

intelligent lighting
TECHNOLOGIES EMPLOYED IN Water efficient

fixtures and fittings 67%
GREEN BUILDING PROJECTS Insulation products for roofs,

ceilings, walls and pipes
62%
Rainwater and stormwater 58%

management/retention
To assess the relative significance of the various technologies
available for achieving green building credentials, we asked our Energy efficient appliances 51%
respondents to indicate what they had actually used at least
Use of recycled or
once in any of their projects. renewable materials
51%
Sustainable
Overall in South East Asia, the most frequently mentioned roofing solutions
51%
itemswere:
Renewable Energy Systems 49%
Energy efficient/intelligent lighting
Water efficient fixtures and fittings High efficiency packaged
34%
Insulation products HVCA systems
Rainwater and stormwater management/retention Sustainable wastewater 33%
management
However, sitting just behind this group with around 50% Energy management Systems (EMS) 32%
frequency of mention were:
Energy efficient appliances Whole building energy simulation 26%
Use of recycled or renewable materials
Water sub-metering and leak
Sustainable roofing solutions (including reflective and detection systems 24%
greenroofs)
Responsible sourcing of bio-based and
Renewable energy systems renewable (raw)materials
21%
Intelligent HVCA
monitoring systemst 18%
Co-generation and
8%
tri-generation

TECHNOLOGIES EMPLOYED IN GREEN BUILDING PROJECTS
hong kong indonesia

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
83%
Renewable Energy Systems
Rainwater and stormwater Water efficient

75% fixtures and fittings 63%
Water efficient Insulation products for roofs,
67% 59%
fixtures and fittings ceilings, walls and pipes
Sustainable Energy efficient appliances 59%

67%
roofing solutions
Energy efficient/ Rainwater and stormwater

58% management/retention 49%
Energy efficient appliances 58% Sustainable 49%

roofing solutions
Energy management Systems (EMS) 58% Sustainable wastewater 49%

management
Insulation products for roofs, 50% Renewable Energy Systems 43%
Use of recycled or Use of recycled or

50% renewable materials 34%
renewable materials
High efficiency packaged High efficiency packaged
HVCA systems 50% 33%
HVCA systems
Intelligent HVCA Whole building energy simulation
50% 33%
monitoring systemst
Sustainable wastewater Energy management Systems (EMS)

42% 31%
management
Whole building energy simulation 33% detection systems 30%
Water sub-metering and leak Responsible sourcing of bio-based and

33% 24%
detection systems renewable (raw)materials
Responsible sourcing of bio-based and Intelligent HVCA

33% monitoring systemst 16%
renewable (raw)materials
Co-generation and Co-generation and
tri-generation 18% tri-generation 9%

MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

management/retention intelligent lighting
Water efficient Insulation products for roofs,
fixtures and fittings 67% ceilings, walls and pipes 69%
Energy efficient/ Water efficient

67% 67%
intelligent lighting fixtures and fittings
Insulation products for roofs, 63%

ceilings, walls and pipes management/retention
Use of recycled or 56%

renewable materials renewable materials
Sustainable Energy efficient appliances

55% 51%
roofing solutions
Renewable Energy Systems 55% Renewable Energy Systems 51%
Energy efficient appliances 46% Sustainable roofing solutions 49%
High efficiency packaged

Energy management Systems (EMS) 40% 42%
HVCA systems
Intelligent HVCA 37% Sustainable wastewater 42%

monitoring systemst management
Whole building energy simulation Responsible sourcing of bio-based

28% 21%
and renewable (raw)materials
Sustainable wastewater
28% Energy management Systems (EMS) 18%
management
Water sub-metering and leak Water sub-metering and leak
detection systems 24% detection systems 15%
Intelligent HVCA Whole building energy simulation

18% 13%
monitoring systemst
Responsible sourcing of bio-based Intelligent HVCA
and renewable (raw)materials 17% monitoring systemst 13%
Co-generation and Co-generation and

6% 8%
tri-generation tri-generation

SINGAPORE THAILAND
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Water efficient 79%

Insulation products for roofs, 71%
fixtures and fittings ceilings, walls and pipes
Energy efficient/
intelligent lighting 79% Renewable Energy Systems 53%
Use of recycled or Sustainable

74% 53%
renewable materials roofing solutions
Energy efficient appliances 57%

renewable materials
Rainwater and stormwater Water efficient 47%

55%
management/retention fixtures and fittings
Insulation products for roofs, Energy efficient/

55% 47%
ceilings, walls and pipes intelligent lighting
Sustainable 43% Energy management Systems (EMS) 41%

roofing solutions
Energy management Systems (EMS) 42% Energy efficient appliances 35%
Water sub-metering and leak Rainwater and stormwater

39% 29%
detection systems management/retention
37%
Responsible sourcing of bio-based 29%
Renewable Energy Systems
Whole building energy simulation 28% Whole building energy simulation 24%
High efficiency packaged Co-generation and

HVCA systems 26% 24%
tri-generation
Sustainable wastewater Intelligent HVCA

22% monitoring systemst 12%
management
Responsible sourcing of bio-based and Sustainable wastewater management
22% 12%
renewable (raw)materials
Intelligent HVCA Water sub-metering and leak
monitoring systemst 11% detection systems 12%
Co-generation and High efficiency packaged

tri-generation 7% HVCA systems 6%

VIETNAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Water efficient 79%

fixtures and fittings
Energy efficient/
72%
Energy efficient appliances 72%
Insulation products for roofs,

69%
Sustainable 55%
roofing solutions
High efficiency packaged

55%
HVCA systems
Renewable Energy Systems 52%

Use of recycled or
renewable materials 48%
Whole building energy 38%

simulation
Responsible sourcing of bio-based
34%
Intelligent HVCA
34%
monitoring systemst
Energy management Systems (EMS) 31%
Sustainable wastewater management 31%

detection systems 31%
Co-generation and
tri-generation 3%

IES Pink Batts;
EnergyPlus (incl. gEnergy,
SketchUp, OpenStudio); Autodesk;
Lafarge;
Philips; DesignBuilder; eQUEST;
Lamitak;
SCG Trading;
LDG Architects; General Ecotect; Artelia; Carrier; Johnson
Daikin; Mitsubishi;
Electric; CONWOOD; Bach Controls; TAS; Schneider;
Forbo Flooring; JOE Top-Mix Durable Concrete; Nil; Trane; Carrier; York;
Green; Samwoh; TPPS; Arcrete; Khoa; Vincye; ENiTo; Linh Elmich; Somfy; Trane; DOE; Panasonic; LG VRF; Johnson
LDG Architects; Jotun; General Electric; Khnh Vy; BASF MYBIM; Elite; Mitsubishi;
Controls; PowerPax; Sharp;
Aatomo; Conwood; Boral; Interface; Akzo Simons; Allwn; ArchiCAD;
Nobel / ICI Paints; Maxwood; White Horse; Super Veritas; Jones Lang LaSalle Samsung; Toshiba; Siemens;
Timber; StoneworksAsia; UrbanStone; Vert Solcon; Leechui; Forsspac Ree; McQuay; Kelvinator; Daikin;
Eco-Brick; Dulux; ENVIRO2; Marmoleum; Brentwoord GCB; TROX; Lennox; Johnson
Green Building
Door; James Hardie; APO Floors; Puyat Steel; Mariwasa; Concepcion Industries; Controls;
Biomass Ecobrick; Envirowall; CRUPE; MATIMCO; CT Wood
Responsible Whole Mitsubishi; Trane;
Fujitsu
Nippon; Shera Inovar; YTL Cement; Rockwool; Eviro
sourcing of building Siemens; Panasonic;
Floors and Walls; Idea Green; Acotech; energy Honeywell; Schneider; Sharp;
Products and Technologies - EnGro; Armstrong; Kianson;
Rockmann; Gymsum
bio-based and
renewable (raw) simulation
Energy efficient/
Samsung; Carrier; Fujitsu; McQuay;
Brand Recognition General

Electric; Schneider; Use of recycled
materials intelligent
Delta; Inncom; Brandt; Campbell;
Lennox; Uniden; Yanmar; Alerton
Jaman; Honeywell; lighting
or renewable materials
Johnson
Voffman; Watersave;
Controls; Honeywell;
Elster Water Metering Intelligent HCVA
We asked our respondents to Water Siemens; Schneider; General
monitoring systems Electric; Alstom; Trane; Uniwell; Asahi
nominate 2 to 3 brands for each sub-metering
and leak detection Glass; Delta; LinkCycle; SGS; Cworks; AZZO;
BioKube;
ofthetechnologies that we had BioFill; Poloplast systems Mitsubishi; Greensense; Switch Automation;
Somfy; Osram; AZ e-lite; Inncom
previously identified. We then collated (Polymutan); Latham Engineering; Energy management
the responses and have listed the Fast Flow; HumeCeptor; Mitsubishi;
BioCycle; Filtrex; Elmich; Hitachi; Biotech;
Sustainable L EA DE RS Systems (EMS)
BlueScope/Lysaght; Monier; Kingspan;
wastewater management
brands accordingto the frequency Bioseptic; Cty Ha Cht Vit M;
Composite Linh Pht; An Am Pht
WA NT E D! Sustainable
Sika; DECRA; Roxul; Roofmac; Davies
Roofshield; Lafarge; Solatube; Spar
ofmention. roofing solutions Roofing; Skyrise Greenery; SCG Trading;
Rainwater and stormwater
Bacfree; Emerald Pipes; WaterCare; Rainwater S.E.A. Olympus; Hitchins; Onduline;
management/
HOG; Elmich; Fast Flow; Stormwater 360; Monier; Bauder; Firestone; Ritek; LCP; Alpolic;
retention
Syfon; Wisy; Grundfos; Mitsubishi; Kohler; Pentair; Reflective Zacks; Cattuong Corp; L V; Hoa Sen
Hitchins; Moog CSA Engineering; I-Control; I-Water; Water efficient roofing materials, Group; Gutal; Bituruv; Taso
PAINPISCO; JOVEN; SISTEM VAKUM; fixtures and fittings
ACO Building Drainage; Insulation green roofs
Bluescope/
Toto; American Energy
Aura-Lite; Ecogen; products for Lysaght; Monier;
Folder-2; Standard; Rigel; Grohe; efficient Energy Terreal; SCG Trading; Hitchins; Sika;
appliances roofs, ceilings,
Kohler; HCG; Hansgrohe; Johnson efficient/ Renewable Kawara; Jotun; Uniseal (PlanterCell); Garden and
Suisse; Duravit; LIXIL / INAX; DOE; Caroma; intelligent
walls and pipes Landscape Decks; Tropical Environment; Elmich; Hoa Sen
Energy
WELS; Clayton; Regal; Rheem; Geberit; lighting Systems Group; Galvalume; Flex Seal; Supersonic; DN Steel;
Rockwool; Spar Roofing; GreenSeal; Insuladd; Superlume;
Panasonic; Unnamed GWA brand; LG; Samsung; Boral; BlueScope/
WIKA; Groundforce; JEC; Premtex; Philips; Panasonic; Lysaght; Kingspan; SCG
OzoProtect; Penten; CertainTeed; HMT;
Picenza; Babu & Company; Mitsubishi; General Electric; Trading; Armacell; Roxul; CSR MetalPlas;Puyat Steel; Kamak; Eco-
LG; Daikin; AC/AHU/Aircon; Philips; Bradford; Ecowool; Aeroflex; Knauf; CSR Roofs; Green Turf; Alpolic; ZinCo;
COTTO; Villeroy & Boch; Hitachi; Energy Star; Sharp; Bradford; Fletcher; Thermobreak; Wilhams;
General Electric; LED; Solahart; Schneider; Tra Chang; Firestone; Pht
NEA; PUB; Sloan; Bosch; Electrolux; Carrier; Osram, Sylvania; T5; Autex; Armacell; MetalPlas; YKK; Hoa Sen
Phoenix Solar; Canadian Lc; Vit Php
Saniton; Solahart; General Electronics; Firefly; Elek; Legrand; Solar; General Electric;
Group; I STEEL; POLYGLASS; 3D Panel
; Sony; Toshiba; Sub-Zero; Systems; Jardine Davies; Dwightsteel; Camel;
Thorn; Schneider, Clipsal; Wika; Solatube; Polymeur Cycleworld; Coolmax; Par Sag; CSI Insulation;
Danfoss; Big Ass; Aerotron/Aeratron
Megaman; Global Energy Sun; Toshiba; Bosch; Kyocera; Dow; Bostik; Sika; Monier; Thermac/Aerofoil; Pink
(?); Fisher & Paykel; Akari Energy;
Osram; Clipsal; Kelvinator; Condura; Services (GES); Panasonic; Sole S.A.; REN Industries; Batts; Vert Solcon; Union Foam; Apo; Parsec; S.E.A.
Mitsubishi; Samsung; Siemens; Olympus; C&S Insulation; C.P.A.C. Insulation;
Toto; LTi; Vert Solcon; Delonghi; Edward Marcs; OneRenewable; Neltex; Celotex; China Equipment;
Zanussi; Grundfos; KONE; ABB; Inncom; Davis; Brightlux; PHESI; Urban Green Energy; Ct Tng; ORCA; Zincalume;
Domus; York; Rheem; Cree; Akari; L&E; AZ e-lite;
QuietRevolution; REC Solar; Tri Tonmat; GYMBROC; Gabus;
BabuMegasun; Vert Solcon; Organic Response IKA; Wavin; Jaya
Solar; SMA Solar Technology;
Tsmart; Lighting; Tal; R&C DECO LIGHTING; Board
Solenergy; Cookes Renewable Energy;
Fumaco; Jung; Luxlite; Aztech; Erco;
Greenlamp; EVN; MegaSun; Energy Matters; Mercury Energy; Alpha
Anh Phuong Nam Renewables; Joven; Bach Khoa;
Handal
GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT FOR
AUSTRALIA/NEW ZEALAND 2014
GREEN
BUILDING
While BCI Economics was surveying the green building market in South East Asia, we were
also analysing responses from 243 developers, architects, main- and sub-contractors in
MARKET
Australia and New Zealand to a questionnaire about their views on and experiences with
green building.
In this survey, we found that virtually 90% of respondents in Australia and just over 80% in
New Zealand have been involved in a project that entailed green building elements during
the period 2008-2014.
REPORT
Australia
In contrast with their South East Asian counterparts, only 34% of Australian and 24% of
N ew Z e a l a nd
2014
NewZealand respondents were prepared to proceed with green building certification.
Attitudes for and against the adoption of green building principles in general as expressed
by the Australian and New Zealand respondents were fairly comparable with those in
SouthEastAsia with the additional costs incurred in green building being balanced against
the perceived commercial benefits. Interestingly, although the additional upfront costs were
perceived to be lower in Australia and New Zealand than in South East Asia, the financial
benefits were also seen to be proportionately less.
Across the countries, water efficient fixtures and fittingsstood out as being frequently
incorporated into green building projects together with energy efficient/intelligent lighting and
insulation products although the individual rankings did vary. And, as has been done for
Atondadvise
South East Asia, we have reported the popular brands identified by the participants in the
Australia and New Zealand survey.
we are happy
If we have sparked your interest you can easily access the results of the survey by logging
on to: that the
http://www.bciaustralia.com/bci-economics/green-building-market-report-2014/
report may be
downloaded
free of charge!

METHODOLOGY
Research for this report was conducted under the supervision of Dr Matthias Krups PhD, Chairman
of BCI Media Group and spearheaded by Petra Berning, General Manager of BCI Economics.
The survey was taken online and analysed by BCI Economics in-house analysts. Between March
and May of 2014, invitations to participate in our online survey were sent out to a random sample
of contacts drawn from BCIs highly sophisticated industry database. Given that the decision to
participate in the survey was out of interest in the topic of green building, it is fair to assume that our
sample would be likely skewed in favour of sustainability principles.
In order to compare the 2014 results with the results ascertained in the prior surveys in 2008, we
utilised a questionnaire that was similar to the previous surveys. A few changes were made to take
account of the new conditions in the market.
For those issues where value judgements were canvassed, a 4 or 5 point Likert scale was adopted
with 1 representing a very negative rating and 4 or 5 a very positive rating.

DISCLAIMER
Information utilised in this report is current as of 1 September 2014. This information has been prepared without
taking your specific needs or objectives into account. Because of this you should consider its appropriateness
with regard to your objectives or needs before acting on this information. BCI Asia does not warrant the
accuracy or completeness of the information in this publication, and accepts no, and disclaims all, liability
for any loss or damage whether occasioned by reliance on such information or otherwise. The information is
subject to change without notice and BCI Asia is under no obligation to update the information or correct any
inaccuracy which may become apparent at a later date.
BCI Economics
CONTACTS
Matthias Krups PhD Robert Krups Petra Berning

CEO BCI Media Group COO BCI Asia General Manager BCI Economics
E: m.krups@bcimediagroup.com E: r.krups@bciasia.com E: p.berning@bcimediagroup.com

P: 0421 381 000 P: (02) 9432 4142 P: (+49) 2501 809875
Don Smith Sally Kheng

Senior Analyst BCI Economics Regional Research Director
E: d.smith@bciaustralia.com E: s.kheng@bciasia.com
P: (02) 9432 4124 P: (+65) 6536 7197

Green Building Market Report 2014 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Green Building Market Report 2014 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GREEN

WorldGreen Building Council:

1 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

Dr. Matthias Krups

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 2

3 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

the additional costs of building materials

the cost of the certification process,

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 4

prediction and evaluation of natural (solar) lighting

energy efficient/intelligent lighting

5 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

Green building has become an unstoppable force.

Established Emerging Prospective Associated Group

Australia Indonesia Sri Lanka Bangladesh

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 10

11 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 12

Greenwall Wood Composite Decking Wood Composite Decking

South East Asia

15 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

GREEN BUILDING ACTIVITY

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 16

Owner/Developer Professional Services

100% 70% 100% 81%

17 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

HONG KONG malaysia

100% 83% 100% 83%

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 18

100% 100% 82%

19 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 20

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Hong Kong 90%

21 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

Learn more at www.distech-controls.com/GREEN

Envac Far East Ltd. Tel : 852-28698838 envac.hk@envac.com.hk www.envacgroup.com

FOR GREEN BUILDING (1) (4)

- BY BUILDING CATEGORY - Commercial/

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 24

hong kong indonesia

no growth strong growth no growth strong growth

Education 3.4 Education 3.6

Hospitality 3.2 Hospitality 3.5

Commercial/Office 2.9 Multi Residential 3.4

Healthcare 2.8 Single Residential 3.3

Single Residential 2.4 Industrial 3.2

Industrial 2.1 Retail 2.9

25 GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SOUTH EAST ASIA

no growth strong growth no growth strong growth

Commercial/Office 3.2 Multi Residential 3.3

Multi Residential 3.1 Single Residential 3.3

Healthcare 2.9 Commercial/Office 3.2

Hospitality 2.9 Hospitality 3.1

Retail 2.8 Industrial 3.0

Industrial 2.5 Retail 2.9

GREEN BUILDING MARKET REPORT SO U T H E AST ASI A 26

no growth strong growth no growth strong growth

Commercial/Office 3.4 Education 3.6

Education 3.2 Hospitality 3.5

Multi Residential 3.2 Healthcare 3.3

Hospitality 2.9 Industrial 3.3

Retail 2.8 Retail 3.2