Miraj, P; Berawi, M A and Utami, S R (2021) Economic feasibility of green office building: Combining life cycle cost analysis and cost–benefit evaluation. Building Research & Information, 49(6), pp. 624-638. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Construction practitioners have adopted the green building (GB) concept to restore environmental damage caused by the built environment over the last decade. However, there is inconclusive debate regarding GB savings' potential to recover the cost of construction, maintenance, and renewals. This paper evaluates the feasibility of green-certified office buildings in Indonesia by comparing the life cycle cost and presents the cost–benefit ratio. Data were obtained from primary data and combined with reliable secondary sources for analysis. The result shows that GB requires an additional cost of 9.22% but offers energy and water savings over the building’s life cycle accounted for 58.65%. Research has shown that GB adoption reduces the cost per square metre by 41.74% over the traditional one. The cost–benefit ratio of energy, water, and carbon emissions was 2.35 and thus, justified the increased costs of investment, maintenance, and renewals of GB. This research’s findings can assist policymakers, practitioners, developers, and other interested parties in the construction sector in bringing forward regulatory changes, collaboration initiatives, capital investment, or other decision-making support.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; cost–benefit analysis; green building; life cycle cost; sustainability |
| Index terms: | life cycle cost, construction practitioner, capital investment, renewal, construction sector, practitioner, green building, green office, decision-making, collaboration, savings, office building, life cycle, life cycle cost analysis, carbon emission, Indonesia, built environment |
| Subjects: | economics, research methods, design practice, renovation and retrofit, management, professional development, Geography, decision analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, construction type, practitioner, value management, climate science, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here