Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 45

Towards Sustainable Buildings in Malaysia:

Evaluating Malaysian Green Building Index
Abdul Samad, Muna Hanim l , Azizan, Farah Diyana2
1,2 Universiti Sains Malaysia. Malaysia

Abstract
Towards the end of the last century, the industry and transport sectors were
identified as the two main culprits responsible for the degradation of our
environment. However, currently the role played by buildings and the
construction industry has been identified as the major source of energy
consumption in the developed countries. lt was against this backdrop and
heeding the increasing demands from end-users for green-rated buildings amidst
a growing environmentally conscious society, Malaysia's very own green rating
tool, the Green Building Index (GBI) was launched on May 21 st 2009. The
launching of GBI this year offers Malaysia a voluntary rating tool developed by
Malaysian Institute of Architects (PAM) and the Association of Consulting
Engineers Malaysia (ACEM). However, as a voluntary tool will GBI be
sufficient as a driving force for change in the future? It has been identified that
the three main obstacles to construction of energy-efficient building are: (1)
deficiencies in public policies to stimulate energy efficiency, (2) restrained
governmental efforts to regulate the building industry, and (3) conservative
practices in the building industry. Holistic approach on social issues is hard to
quantifY as it cross issues beyond the physical, political, government and entails
other intangible aspects. Hence, without a strong shift in the legal framework
and legislation as weIl as strong will for change amongst stakeholders and key
players GBI may not be a forceful tool for change in Malaysia. This paper
discusses on the way forward of how Malaysia can leap at the cutting edge
towards sustainable development of the built environment in the future.

Keywords: Green Building Index, Building rating tool, green development

46 Abdul Samad, Muna Hanim, Azizan & Farah Diyana

1 Introduction

The worldwide building sector consumes as much as 40 percent of the world's

energy, 12 percent of its water and contributes 40 percent of the waste sent to
landfills. Building and construction activities worldwide consume 3 billion tons
of raw materials each year or 40 percent of total global use (KT AK, 2009). This
was the result of the realization the built environment contributes significantly to
green house gas emissions and thus they needed to be re-designed to reduce their
negative impact to the environment. Buildings can last for decades, therefore
they have a very large carbon footprint. Since there is a large amount of carbon
coming from our buildings that are disposed into the atmosphere, thus the clear
solution to mitigate the problem of cJimate change must include changing the
way we design and use our buildings.
Global environmental issues have been gaining enough momentum in certain
countries to command a change of governmental policies and proactive public
action. Malaysia has not been one of those countries until now. These issues
have begun rearing its green head in our society and starting to make an impact.
In Malaysia, the urban population is expected to increase by 40 to 50 percent by
2030 (The Edge, 2009). In terms of energy use per capita, Malaysia surpasses the
other ASEAN countries such as Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia and
Thailand (The Edge, 2009). On average, a Malaysian uses 300 litres of water a
day, double the recommendation by the United Nations of 150 litres/day. The
energy requirement is predicted to be 18 gigawatts in 2020 and 23 gigawatts in
2030 (KT AK, 2009). In this regard, the use of green building techniques such as
renewable sources for energy, energy-efficiency appliances and energy-saving
building measures will help to reduce carbon emission and make our world a
cleaner and healthier place to live.
This paper is conducted as part of the research in Malaysia to investigate the
awareness and knowledge of the professionals in the buHt industry regarding the
concept of sustainable development and the impiementation of Malaysia's green
rating tool, Green Building Index (GBI). However the research is only at the
initial stage and the findings are based on literature review on existing green
rating tools and overview of GBI. The efforts by the Malaysian govemment,
non-govemment organizations and construction players to promote sustainability
in the built industry are also highlighted in this paper.

2 A Review on Green Rating Tools

In Malaysia, volatile energy prices caused by fluctuating energy demands and

supply have made energy efficiency critical in reducing threat from global
warming and greenhouse gas emissions, sending a signal for the country to adopt
greener and sustainabJe approach. A comparative look at the energy intensity
(consumption versus GDP) as shown in Figure I shows that Malaysia and other
third world countries are amongst the highest energy consumers in comparison to
Japan and Denmark (KTAK, 2004). This has led the Government to device some
Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 47

rectifying measures. The Chapter 19 of the Ninth Malaysian Plan the annual
blueprint on the country's policy and implementation touches on Sustainable
Energy Deve!opment which underlines that "in ensuring efficient utilisation of
energy resources and minimisation of wastage, the focus will be on energy
efficiency initiatives, particularly in the industrial, transport and commercial
sectors as weIl as in government buildings." In Promoting Environmental
Stewardship, the Chapter 22 stated that, "the Government will place emphasis on
preventive measures to mitigate and minimise pollution as weIl as address other
adverse environmental impacts arising from development activities. In addition
steps will be undertaken to identify and adopt actions to promote sustainable
natural resources management practices in relation to land, water, forest, energy
and marine resources

Figure 1: Comparative Energy Use Intensity (Energy intensity is a measure

of energy consumption against GDP) Source: Ministry of Energy, Water and
Communications, 2004)
Since the detrimental effects of construction practices on the natural
environment were highlighted, the performance of the buildings has become a
major concern for occupants and built environment professionals (Crawley and
Aho, 1999; Ding, 2008; Cooper, 1999; Kohler, 1999; and Finnveden and
Momberg, 2005). In response to this concern of reducing environmental impact
of the design and operation of buildings, many researchers have developed
methods for measuring environmental performance 0 buildings with the intention
of creating a sustainable built environment (Crawley and Aho, 1999; BIom,
2004). The British Research Establishment Environmental Assessment
Methodology (BREEAM) developed in 1990 by the British Research
Establishment was the "first real attempt to establish a comprehensive means
simultaneously assessing a broad range (j{ environmental considerations in
building" (Haapio, 2008). Subsequent to this, numerous tools have been
developed or adapted from existing assessment tools (Cole. 2005; Haapio, 2008).
48 Abdul Samad, Muna Hanim, Azizan & Farah Diyana

Green building rating tools are also referred to (but not limited to) as green
building rating systems (Yudelson, 2008), building environmental assessment
tools/methods/systems (Gomes, 2007; Cole, 1998), and environmental
assessment tools (Biom, 2004).
These tools enhance the environmental awareness of building practices and
provide fundamental direction for the building industry to move toward
environmental protection and the achievement of sustainability (Ding, 2008).
They provide a way of showing that a building has been successful in meeting an
expected level of performance in various declared criteria (Cole, 2005). Their
adoption and promotion has had a major contribution to creating a market
demand for green buildings and has significantly shifted the public's awareness
and perceptions of what building quality is (Cole, 2005). This is confirmed by
the increasing number of people demanding information on environmental
aspects of buildings, such as whether or not a building is good for their health or
if it fits into a sustainable society (Carlson & Lundgren, 2002).

2.1 The existing green rating tools around the globe

Greenhouse gasses and ozone depletion became household words following the
Earth Summit in Rio, 1992. Since then Green building ratings began to be
developed in the 1990s with BREEAM (UK, 1990) and later LEED (USA, 1996)
being the better known ones (GBI, 2009). A majority of the existing green
building rating tools are voluntary in their application (Cole, 1999) and can be
used to assess the performance of existing buildings or the design of new
buildings (Cole, 1998). It is therefore crucial that the potential and actual
performances are differentiated. Although existing evidence suggests that the
actual performance of the building in use is the most significant measure, the
potential performance provides information that can be used to guide the future
actions of built environment professionals (Bordass and Leaman, 1997 in Cole,
1998).
Most rating tools are currently used toward the end ofthe design phase. This,
in terms of building performance, limits the ability to influence the design
(Haapio, 2008), because problems experienced in the operation of a building (i.e.
downstream) are symptomatic ofneglect in design (i.e. upstream), see dotted line
in Figure 2 (Sparrius, 1998 in Conradie and Roux, 2008). Therefore in order to
positively influence the building performance, ambitions to contribute to
sustainability should be dealt with at the initial stage (Eden et al, 2003).
Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 49

Ability to Influence BulIdIng Performance

Life-cycle Cast

Ability to
innuence at !his
point is very low
and coot is high

Design Construction Operation Disassembly

Building llfe Cycle

Figure 2: Ability to Influence Building Performance (Sebake, 2009,after

Sparrius, 1998 in Conradie and Roux, 2008)

The first generation of rating tools originated in developed countries (Cole,

2005) and primarily focused on environmental assessments of buildings (Cole,
1998). Rating tools that have been created in developing countries, which have
more pressing social and economic concems, need to re fleet these concems
(Kaatz et al, 2002). An example of a rating tool developed in a developing
country, namely South Africa, is the SBAT, developed to relate strongly to the
context of a developing country and to support sustainable development. The
support of sustainable development is reflected in the headings used for the
tool's objectives, namely environmental, economic and social (Gibberd, 2003).
Table 1: Examples of existing green building rating tools (Sebake, 2009)

3 Water
4 E<ology Courts
-5 Lan,j U5e Industnal Vnlts
6 Materials 6 Prisoos
7 Pollution 7 Retal~
8 Heallh and well·bemg e Schools
9 Management 9 Mulb-resldential
10 NIlighbourhood,
lEEO"--··-----uniied Sfates Green I Energy alid atmosphere 1. Offices htlp!!wwW u5gb< ·orgiLEED
6ullding Councll 2 Water effiClencv 2 Hornes
IlISGBC) '" 1M3 3 Sus1alnoble sltes 3 Neighboumood
:1 Ma1emJls and resource-s developmenl
I) Indoor enoJlronrrlenlal 4. Retaii
5 HeaHhcare

4 Ecology and use 4 (Industrlei DUlldmgs)

5 EmIssions 5 (Mixed US€ residentlaI!
-0 Materials ß (Mrx:ed use)
7 IEQ 7 (Healthcare)
8 Man,agen'ent,
50 Abdul Samad, Muna Hanim, Azizan & Farah Diyana

Table I presents three of some of the most common qualitative green

building rating tools. The developer, year of establishment, categories and
current versions (pilot versions are listed in brackets) are reviewed. Buildings are
assessed at various stages of the building life cycle, including new and existing
construction (Sebake, 2009).

3 Malaysia's Green Rating Tool: Green Building Index (GDI)

Malaysia finaUy realized that buildings and the built environment contribute
significantly to green house gas emissions, and thus needed to be re-designed to
reduce their negative impact to the environment. In an effort to promote an
environmentally friendly property and construction industry, the Malaysian
Institute of Architects (PAM) and the Association of Consulting Engineer
Malaysia (ACEM) has devised a green rating tool after some studies in different
green building rating schemes around the globe, aptly called the Green Building
Index (GBI) set up, in April 2009, towards becoming more environment­
friendly. The GBI is one ofthe myriad green rating system that has already been
adopted by the UK (BREAM), US (LEED), Singapore (Green Mark), Japan
(CASBEE), Indonesia (Greenship), Australia and New Zealand (Green Star).
The GBI will be a first for measuring sustainability levels of buildings in a
tropical zone besides the Singapore government's Greenmark.
GBI Malaysia is a benchmarking rating system that provides a
comprehensive framework to evaluate the environmental impact and
performance of buildings based on the 6 key criteria: Energy Efficiency; Indoor
Environmental Quality; Sustainable Site Planning & Management; Material &
Resources; Water Efficiency; and Innovation. According to GBI (2009), a total
of 11 projects have applied for GBI certification under the pilot programme
prior to the launch. The projects vary from individual hornes, shopping malls,
office blocks and condominiums. The GBI is currently split into two types,
residential and non-residential buildings that have different requirements. The
rating has four classifications which are certified silver, gold and platinum.
Points are awarded to each stage with as low as 50 points for certified to as high
as 86 to 100 points for platinum. Achieving points in these targeted areas will
mean that the building will likely be more environment-friendly than those that
do not address the issues. Under the GBI assessment framework, points will also
be awarded for achieving and incorporating environment-friendly features wh ich
are above current industry practice.

3.1 GBI compared to other existing Green Rating Tools.

Green rating tools by its nature and role is very dependent upon location and
environment and thus local climate. A quick survey of existing Green Rating
tools available in the world today will show all of them concentrated within the
temperate climate zones include UK's BREEAM, USA's LEED, Japan's
CASBEE and Australia's GREENSTAR. BREEAM, LEED and Green Star are
the three most widely recognized environmental assessment methodologies used
Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 5]

in the construction industry today. Whilst the thrust of the two are similar - i.e.
conserving energy and reducing carbon emissions, generally it i8 not
straightforward to compare the two.
According to Haapio (2008), what might be applicable in one assessment
method might not be relevant in another. The rating tools reviewed may be used
at both national and global level. Globally these tools have either been adapted to
a specific country (e.g. the US LEED adapted for Canada and Australian Green
Star adapted for New Zealand and South Africa) or developed into a new tool
(i.e. the development of Green Star and SBAT were influenced by BREEAM and
LEED).
All green buildings rating tool5 around the world has different emphasis. The
launched of Malaysia' Green Building Index or GBI last year will be the only
rating tool for the tropical zones and suit the local market other than Singapore
Government's GREENMARK which was first launched in 2005 (GBI, 2009). In
April 2008, it became mandatory for all new buildings or works on existing
buildings exceeding 2,000sq.m in floor area to achieve a minimum
GREENMARK Certified rating in Singapore (GBI, 2009).
Whilst GREENMARK's operational parameters are within the tropical
cl imate, its scoring priorities are very much customized for the current state of
Singapore where a lot of priority is given to energy and water efficiency scores.
In addition its public transport network is also already in place and thus little
priority is given to this in the ratings. In the GBI, however, access to public
transport is given much weight. Malaysia differs markedly in these areas and
thus understandably our rating pr ioriti es should be Iike-wise customized to suit
to our culture and climate as well as the current state of our country's economic
development, infrastructures, existing resources and social needs. However
compared to other prominent green rating tools such as LEED and BREEAM,
they are more detailed in its requirements as they are at a more mature stage of
development

3.2 Moving Forward towards sustainabJe Malaysia

The sehe me is still in the early stages and only a few projects are registered so
far; however with a local rating scheme now in place, this will help increase the
awareness over building sustainability. With the newly launched of Non­
residential Existing Building tool last May brings GBI to another step forward
towards encouraging green design amongst the key players. This means old
buildings which are retrofitted to be energy efficient and less polluting can apply
for the GBI award. By retro-fitting an old building to become a certified "green"
building, its value is enhanced hence it draws investors, and offers a better
environment for its inhabitants (The Star, 20]0). It is looked as an essential
guide for property owners to recondition existing buildings to meet
environmental standards. The recent launched ofGreen Building Index (GBI) for
Non-Residential Existing Buildings (NREB) rating system will give old
buildings a new lease oflife. The NREB tool which complements GBI's existing
52 Abdul Samad, Muna Hanim, Azizan & Farah Diyana

rating systems for new buildings in the residential and non residential categories,
is third in the array. Soon to come will be the rating tool for townships and
neighbourhood and industrial buildings. The GEI green certification of
townships will be the first as most countries do not have it (The Star, 2008).
Unlike the criteria for buildings, those for townships will emphasize on the
ecological impact and social issues of the project since a Iarger site would be
involved.
Although green building initiatives in Malaysia are still at an infancy stage,
yet the awareness of its financial and tangible benefits is increasing. The need for
lower operation al cost is the main reason for companies to adopt green concepts.
The govemment is also committed in promoting green concepts with the
establishment of Energy, Green Technology and Water Ministry, under the
leadership of Datuk Peter Chin. Future govemment buildings will soon be
incorporating green concepts. The launch of Malaysia's very own green rating
tool, Green Building Index, somehow has brought sustainability development in
Malaysia to a higher leveL

4 Conclusion
A holistic approach to provide sustainable, green, and low energy developments
is an important way forward for Malaysia to achieve the quality life whilst
maintaining the capacity of the ecosystem for future generations. According to
Shari et la (2007), sustainable building assessment, rating and labeling system is
a tool that merges mandatory and market driven approaches to promote
sustainability in construction industry. The GBI ratings are currently not
mandatory but it has taken the first few steps in that direction by starting with the
incIusion of Malaysian Standard MS 1525:2007 under the code of practice on
energy efficiency and use of renewable energy for non residential buildings into
the Uniform Building By-Laws (UBBL) (The Edge, 2009). However since it i5
not mandatory, only a few adhere to it and so the buildings never improved. To
promote the application of Green Building Index (GEI), the govemment should
make compulsory policies and institutions which can directly incorporate life
cycIe green building assessment into the basic construction and operation
process. At the same time, as areward, corresponding tax reducHon and
exemption policy should be made which can be cooperated with the application
of GBL Malaysian govemment also must make allocation for a specific
percentage of soft loans and grants to augment budgets on research and
development related to manufacturing and commercialisation of renewable
energy and technologies (Abdul Samad et al, 2008). There must be a joint
investments between the private sector and the financing entities to disseminate
the renewable with technical support from the research and development entities.
Although Malaysia has adopted some of these approach and aforementioned
measures but most are still at voluntary stage and needs further enforcements.
Other measures to achieve green buildings include (Lee and Yik, 2004, Batish,
2007 and Wamock, 2007): i) Education and training program ii) Legal
Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 53

Framework and relevant laws, iii) Financial incentive programs, iv) Measures to
change market demand. Concerted efforts and swift actions must be taken by all
fractions of society from politicians, authorities, professionals, NGOs, educators,
contractors, developers, scientists and the public at large to share the
responsibilities in ensuring our limited resources are sustained for future
generations (Abdul Samad et al, 2008). There i8 still a lot of work that needs to
be done, and educating the building professions, government body and the public
will be one of the key tasks for sustainable development in the country.
Ultimately it is up to the public and business community and industry to
complement government initiatives and drive real change in Malaysia.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi (KPT) Malaysia and
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) for awarding the research grant.

References

Abdul Samad, M.H., Abdul Rahman, A.M. (2007). The Need for a Change in
The Built Environment Curricula in Malaysian Universities And in
Practice. Conference on Sustainable Building South-East Asia (SB07)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 5 -7 November 2007
Abdul Samad, M.H., Abdul Rahman, A.M and Ibrahim, F. (2008). Green
Performance Ratings for Malaysian Buildings With Particular
Reference to Hotels. International Conference on Environment
Research and Technology (lCERT 08), 28- 30 May 2008, Parkroyal
Hotel, Penang.
Bathish, H. (2007). Why Monitoring and Verification & Building Rating Are
Vitally Important in Sustainable Building Industry. Conference on
Sustainable Building South-East Asia (SB07) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
5 -7 November 2007.
Bordass, W. and Leaman, A. (1997). 'Design for manageability' . Building
Research & Information, Vol. 25(3), Pp 148 - 157.
Carlson, P.O. and Lundgren, 1. (2002). 'Environmental status of buildings, new
features in the Swedish system for environmental auditing and assessment of
building.' In proceedings: Sustainable Building Conference, 2002, Oslo,
Norway.
Cole, RJ. (2006). 'Editorial: Building Environmental Assessment: changing the
culture of practice'. Building Research & Information. Vol. 34(4). Pp
303 307.
Cooper, I. (1999). 'Which focus for building assessment methods: environmental
performance or sustainability?'. Building Research & Information. VoL
27 (4/5). Pp 321 - 331.
54 Abdul Samad, Muna Hanim, Azizan & Farah Diyana

Crawley, D. and Aho, I. (1999). 'Building environmental assessment methods:

environmental performance or sustainability?'. Building Research &
Information. Vol. 27 (4/5). Pp 300 - 308.
Ding, G.K.c. (2007). Sustainable Construction-The Role Of Environmental
Assessment Tools, Journal ofEnvironmental Management, Volume 86,
Issue 3, February 2008, 451-464.
Eden, M., Birgersson, L., Dyrssen, C. and Simes, L. (2003). 'Design for
Sustainable Building - Development of a Conceptual Framework for
Improved Design Processes '. In proceedings: Sustainable Built
Environments: Technology and management for Sustainable Building. 26 30
May 2003. Pretoria. (URL: http://www.sustainablebuiltenvironments.com.
Accessed: 5 June 2008).
KTAK (Kementerian Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi) (2004). Low-Energy
Office: The Ministry ofEnergy, Water and Communications Building,
Kementerian Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi, 2004.
Gibberd, J.T. (2003). Integrating Sustainable Development into Briefing and
Design Processes of Buildings in Developing Countries: An Assessment
Tool. University ofPretoria (Dissertation), Pretoria, South Africa.
Gomes da Silva, V. (2007). 'Sustainability assessment of buildings: Would
LEED lead Brazil anywhereT In proceedings: CIB World Building
Congress 2007. 14 18 May 2008, Cape Town, South Africa.
Published abstracts pp. 2417 .~ 2427.
Green Building Index (GBI) (2009), GBI Rating System and Assessment,
Retrieved Jan 6, 2010 from http://www.greenbuildingindex.orglhow­
GBI -works2. html# RatingT 00 ls
Haapio, A. (2008). Environmental Assessment of Buildings. Helsinki University
ofTechnology (Dissertation), Espoo, Finland.
Ninth Malaysian Plan, (2007), Economic Panning Unit, Prime Minister's
Department Malaysia, Retrieved Dec 25, 2009 from
http://www.epu.jpm.my/rm9/english/Contents.pdf
lkeda, A., Abdul Rahman, A. M., Abdul Samad, M. H., (2007) Energy Efficient
Design for Environmentally Sustainable Hotel Industry in Malaysia,
Conference on Sustainable Building South-East Asia (SB07) Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, 5 -7 November 2007.
Lee, W.L and Yik, F.W.H, (2004) Regulatory And Voluntary Approaches For
Enhancing Building Energy Efficiency, Progress in Energy and
Combustion Science, Volume 30, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 477-499
The Edge, (2009). Our Own Green Building Index. Retrieved Jan 10,2010 from
http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/property/128937 -our-own-green­
building-index.html
TN, Sebake (2009). An Overview of Green Building Rating Tools. Pretoria:
CSIR, Built Environment.
Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 55

The Star, (2008). Better Buildings. Retrieved May 4th, 20 I 0 from

http://www.hba.org.my/news/2009/05/better.htm
The Star, (2010). Building Renewal. Retrieved May 4th , 2010 from
http;//thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/20 10/5/4/1ifefocus/61587
92&sec=lifefocus
Shari, Z., Jaffar,M.F.Z, SaIleh, E., Haw, L.C. (2007) Establishing Local
Weighting Values of SBtool for Application in Malaysia, Conference
on Sustainable Building South-East Asia (SB07) Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, 5 -7 November 2007
Warnock, A.C. (2007) An Overview of Integrating Instruments to Achieve
Sustainable Construction and Buildings, Management of Environmental
Quality: An International Journal, Vo1.l8, Pp.427-44I.