13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION AND THE IMPACT ON THE

QUANTITY SURVEYOR
Eugene Seah

Executive Director
1 Magazine Road, Central Mall, #05-01 Singapore 059567
EugeneSeah@dls.com.sg

ABSTRACT

The Sustainability Age in Construction arrived several years ago but it was only until recently
that the industry in Asia turned towards looking at it seriously due to Climate Change. This has opened
new insights to quantity surveying as well as new services to offer to clients. Coupled with the domain
knowledge of core Quantity Surveying, Quantity Surveyors (QS) of today are well positioned to
lead in the sustainable age with cost effective sustainable strategies coupled with well
placed value management and engineering contributions to not only bring down Green Capital
Cost, but also, to personify the ethos of Life Cycle Management, Property
Performance Appraisal, Green Financing and strategies. This paper thus discusses on this new
horizon for the Quantity Surveying fraternity, giving an insight of the future of the QS,
including the use of information technologies such as Building Information Models and
Quantity Information models which are all underlined by the sustainability ethos.

Keywords: Building Information Models, Green Capital Cost, Life Cycle

Management, Property, Performance Appraisal, Quantity Surveying

1. WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?

The Brundtland Commission was convened by the United Nations in 1983

to address growing concern about the accelerating deterioration of the human environment
and natural resources and the consequences of that deterioration for economic and social
development (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). The report has
also defined sustainable development as ‗development that meets the needs of
the present without comprising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs‟.
Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) (2001) has further
captured the essence of sustainable development as shown in Figure 1:-

36
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

SUSTAINABILITY MODEL

Envl' 0""'."'31
A Vlabkl Nato
Enwonm.nt

Su5tam.able ~.
ftalu,a1 and 8uolt Ecooomoc
Enwonmenl Oeye!opmenl
S '
O ,.,"'.fIt
alll.

Figure 1: Sustainability Model (Adapted from CIRIA, 2001)

1.1 Sustainable Construction

It has been widely documented that the building industry and operation of buildings have a
massive direct and indirect impact on the environment. Based on statistics from the Green
Building Council, buildings in the United States account for:
• 72% of electricity consumption,
• 39% of energy use,
• 38% of all carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions,
• 40% of raw materials use,
• 30% of waste output (136 million tons annually), and
• 14% of potable water consumption.

With the continued growth of the global economy and population, the major players in the
building industry such as the clients, designers, quantity surveyors and the builders will have to
face the challenges of meeting the demands for new and existing facilities that are
environmentally friendly, socially acceptable and economically attractive. In relation to the
sustainability model (see Figure 1), it is evident that sustainable construction is the catalyst to
maintain a sustainable development that achieves the triple bottom-line of
environmental, social and economic aspects.

37
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

1.2 Definition of Green Buildings

Generally, ‗Green Buildings‘ can be defined as any building that have been rated as ‗Green‘
by a recognized green building rating system (Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS),
2005a). Some of the rating systems are:-
• LEED (U.S.);
• Green Star (Australia);
• BREEAM (U.K.);
• CASBEE (Japan);
• Green Building Index (Malaysia); and
• Green Mark (Singapore).

2. COST OF “GREEN”

Based on the reports by Davis Langdon 2009, U.S. Green Building Council (2002), Bowman
and Wills (2008) and RICS (2005a), the cost of ―green‖ may be categorized in three main aspects
of environmental costs, social costs and economic costs as detailed below.

2.1 Environmental Costs

The impact of the building industry on the environment has been widely documented. The
range of construction activities and the input of large amount of resources have placed a
tremendous pressure on the industry to improve its image from ― Bricks and
Mortar‖ to ― Green and Mortar‖. Some of the main issues are discussed below.

2.1.1 Indoor Air Quality

Green buildings offer healthier air due to better ventilation and reduce or eliminate the use of
building materials that emits volatile organic compounds.

2.1.2 Energy Efficiency

Green buildings use about 36 percent less energy than conventional buildings and thus lower
operating costs.

2.1.3 Reduce the impacts of natural resources consumption

The use and re-use of local, renewable and recycled materials may help
the development of the local economy and reduce the extraction and processing of virgin
resources.

2.1.4 Water Efficiency

Low-flow fixtures and other water efficient products certified under the Water
Efficient Labelling Scheme (WELS, Singapore), rainwater capture and wastewater
treatments lessen use of potable water and related operating costs.

2.1.5 Reduction of Carbon Emission

Green buildings operate more efficiently and have lower greenhouse gas emissions, resulting in
Green buildings having a smaller carbon footprint which is aligned with the principles of Kyoto
Protocol.

38
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

2.2 Social Costs

Buildings are built primarily for human activities and the social cost of ― green‖ is essentially the
impact of the built environment on human beings. The increase in the awareness
of climate change has changed the needs and requirements of the end user, coupled with the
need for a social buy-in (social equity) which is a critical catalyst for the sustainability wave.

2.2.1 Public Awareness

Increased public awareness of the potential health and safety benefits is pushing the
developers to go green.

2.2.2 Productivity
Enhance occupant comfort and health which would improve workers‘ productivity by
reducing absenteeism.

2.2.3 Talent retention

Providing a healthy workplace improves employee satisfaction, reduces staff turnover
and enhances talent retention.

2.2.4 Marketing advantages

Green buildings tend to attract tenants at a faster rate. Miller, et al.
(2008) have concluded from their casual surveys that LEED-certified buildings are
able to achieve faster absorption rates which are further reinforced by a RREEF
Research on 307
LEED-designated and 626 Energy Star Buildings that green buildings have
lower
vacancy rates.

2.3 Economic Costs

One of the most common barriers to sustainable construction is that there is a

common misconception that ― green‖ buildings will cost more than conventional
buildings and that only capital cost is considered. Although the impact of cost may vary from
region to region, it is widely acknowledged that there is minimal cost impact to attain the basic
level of green building certification. Further to that, there are other intrinsic
economic benefits of a sustainable development which may more than offset the initial cost
of development, some of which will be discussed.:

2.3.1 Improve the bottom line

Achieve better payback period as the net rent achievable from the
tenant should increase with saving in utility bills. A study of the US market by
McGraw Hill found that green buildings delivered the following added value (Bowman
and Wills, 2008):-
• Operating costs decreased by 8-9%;
• Building values increased by 7%;
• Return on Investment (ROI) improved by 6.6%;
• Occupancy ratio increased by 3.5%; and
• Rent ratio increased by 3%.

An earlier research on 60 LEED rated buildings commissioned by

Kats (2003)
concluded that green buildings are:-
• On average 25-30% more energy efficient

39
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

• Characterized by lower electricity peak consumption

• More likely to generate renewable energy on-site about 2 %
• More likely to purchase grid power generated from renewable energy sources
(green power and/or tradable renewable certificates)

Other financial benefits are as illustrated in Table 1:-

Table 1 Financial Benefits of Green Buildings (Kats, 2003)

Summary of Findings (per ft2)

Category 20-year Net Present Value
Energy Savings $5.80
Emissions Savings $1.20
Water Savings $0.50
Operations and Maintenance Savings $8.50
Productivity and Health Benefits $36.90 to $55.30
Subtotal $52.90 to $71.30
Average Extra Cost of Building Green (-$3.00 to -$5.00)
Total 20-year Net Benefit $50 to $65

Miller, et at. (2008) have found that green buildings do attained better rent, occupancy
rates and value as compared to non-green buildings as tabulated in Table 2.

Table 2: General Result Comparisons of Three Studies1 to Date on Rents, Occupancy and
Values (Miller, et al., 2008)

Miller, Fuerst and Eicholtz,

Spivey McAllister Kok
Rent & Florance & Quigley
Green Buildings $29.80 / ft2
Energy Star $30.50 / ft2 $29.34 / ft 2
LEED $42.15 / ft2 $27.07 / ft2
Control Sample $28.00 / ft2 $24.68 / ft2 $28.16 / ft2
(all sample)
Occupancy Rate
Green Buildings 88.99%
Energy Star 91.5% 88.40%
(median)
LEED 92.0% 88.40%
(median)
Control Sample 87.8% 86.06% 81.35%
(all median)
Value Per Sq Ft
(regression result)
LEED 9.9% 31.4%
Energy Star 5.3% 10.3%

40
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

2.3.2 Competitive first costs

Nelson (2007) found that for new construction, the emerging consensus is that with
careful planning, the cost premium for green construction can be minimal to
non- existent. This is possible as integrated design approach requires all the members of
the building project stakeholder community, and the technical planning, design, and
construction team to look at the project objectives, and building materials, systems
and assemblies from many different perspectives (Prowler, 2008). High benefit at low
cost is achieved when synergies between disciplines and between technologies exists
through an integrated team process in which the design team and all affected
stakeholders work together throughout the project phases and to evaluate the design
for cost, quality-of-life, future flexibility, efficiency; overall environmental
impact; productivity, creativity; and how the occupants will be enlivened (Nelson, 2007
and Prowler 2008). Moreover, subsidies and incentives offered by the governments
may be sufficient to offset any premium green costs.

2.3.3 Optimize life-cycle economic performance

Life cycle costing (energy efficiency, employee productivity, etc) has demonstrated
that the green buildings have longer lifespan, reduced replacement costs and lower
operating costs.

2.3.4 Possible lower insurance premiums due to healthier working environment

Leading insurance companies have taken note of the benefits of green buildings, such
as improved indoor air quality, reduced energy use costs, smoother operations and
greater tenant satisfaction, and are offering reduced-cost commercial
insurance products, with a few increasing the premium credits up by 5% to 10%
(Babaeva,
2009).

2.3.5 Reduced risk of obsolescence and less need for refurbishment in the future
Green buildings tend to have longer economic lifespan and thus the buildings
are asset-proofed.

2.3.6 Future proofing of assets

Green buildings are future-proofed against rising technology, energy
costs and tightening regulations on building sustainability performance
(Bowman and Wills,
2008).

3. THE ROLE OF A TRADITIONAL QUANTITY SURVEYOR

The Quantity Surveyor, also known as a Construction Economist, is one of a team of

professional advisers to the construction industry. Quantity Surveyors work
closely with other members of the project team such as the architects, engineers, contractors,
suppliers, project owners, financiers and the like. The key roles of a Quantity Surveyor are to
perform financial control, cost and contractual administration of a project at
every stage, from inception to completion. The scope for Quantity Surveyor is detailed in
Figure 2.0.

41
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

- Advice on Selection of
- Preliminary Cost Advice Contractors
- Project Feasibility Study - Preparation of
- Cost Planning and Expenditure Statements
Budget Establishment for Tax and Accounting
- Technical Auditing
- Assessment of Building
Replacement Values for
Insurance
- Expert Evidence in
arbitration and mediation
- Represent the Employer/
Client in Design and
Build Contract
- Evaluation of life cycle

Feasibility Design Tender Construction Others

Stage Stage Stage Stage

- Budgetary Cost Control - Contract Documentation

- Advice on Contractual - Project Control
Methods and Tendering - Interim Payment
Procedures - Evaluation of Variations

Figure 2: Scope for a Traditional Quantity Surveyor

However, with the growing emphasis on the sustainable

development of the built environment, the Quantity Surveyor will need to adapt and
cater to the new and changing demands of a changing industry. This will be further elaborated in
the next section.

4. SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION AND THE IMPACT ON THE QUANTITY

SURVEYOR

The emphasis of going green is epitomized by a recent comment from the

Minister of National Development in Singapore that the government may impose legislative
measures to ensure that the building industry gets greener and “build more with less‖ (Straits
Times, 9TH July 2009). This is in addition to the enactment of the Building Control
(Environmental
Sustainability) Regulations 2008 which mandates building works which involve a gross
floor area of 2,000 square metres or more to be Green mark certified.

42
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

In April 2009, the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Sustainable Development

(IMCSD) unveiled a blueprint for sustainable development in Singapore for the next 10 to 20
years. It sets out the key strategies on achieving sustainable development to minimize its impacts
on natural resources and ensure that today does not come at the expense of the quality of living
for the future generations.
For a start, the government has set aside $1 billion for the next five years to help implement
plans in the blueprint. Part of this sum will go towards helping businesses reduce the upfront
costs of investing in resource efficient buildings, systems and processes. The S$1 billion sum
includes S$100 million set aside for the new Green Mark Incentive scheme to retrofit existing
private-sector buildings to boost energy efficiency.
On a global front, the opportunities in sustainable construction can be largely seen in
the increasing importance of the equator principles for financing and Clean Development
Mechanism (CDM) projects for carbon trading.
The equator principle is a financial industry benchmark for determining,
assessing and managing social & environmental risk in project financing. The
framework is based on environmental & social standards of the World Bank and
International Finance Corporation (IFC). In general, the equator principles apply to all new
project financings globally with total project capital costs of US$10 million or more, and across
all industry sectors.
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is an arrangement under the Kyoto
Protocol allowing industrialized countries with a greenhouse gas reduction commitment to invest
in projects that reduce emissions in developing countries as an alternative to more expensive
emission reductions in their own countries. The CDM allows emission-reduction projects in
developing countries to earn certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one
tonne of CO2. CERs can be traded and sold, and used by industrialized countries to meet a part
of their targets under the Protocol.
Further to the scope of works carried out by the traditional Quantity Surveyor in section
3.0, the quantity surveyors of today have to be able to adapt and tap on potential opportunities in
new emerging areas so as to remain relevant. The Quantity Surveyor may be able to utilize his
skills and knowledge to assist in securing funding for clients based on the
equator principle as well as to work with client in obtaining carbon credits through CDM projects
in a new world that is focused on sustainable development. We will explore the emerging roles
that a Quantity Surveyor may play in the next section.

5. “GREEN SHOOTS” FOR THR QUANTITY SURVEYOR

The world today presents different opportunities for the Quantity Surveyor as compared to the
past. The current Quantity Surveyor requires to be equipped with the necessary skills and
competencies to ride the next global wave of sustainable development in
order to stay relevant.
Aside from the traditional roles that a QS may feature as described in section 3.0, we will
explore the various new and exciting challenges for the QS in this new era.

43
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

5.1 Green Costing

With the increasing prevalence of green building ratings, the Quantity Surveyor has to be
adept in the knowledge of new and emerging technologies that are being utilized in green
buildings. Cost models have to be updated to cater to Clients‘ needs in regards to the extra over
costs for achieving the different levels of green building certification.
The cost model for green buildings may vary from country to country due to the use
of different green building rating system, maturity of the construction industry
and the availability of materials and technology. In Singapore, the Building
and Construction Authority (BCA) of Singapore has reported a cost premium of 2% to 8% for
green mark platinum projects in Singapore whereas in Australia, (Davis Langdon,
2007), the cost premium of achieving a similar level of certification ranges from 9% to 11%
premium. Furthermore, in a study conducted by Davis Langdon (Matthiessen and Morris, 2004)
it was shown that a LEED certified building does not significantly cost more than a
non-LEED certified building.
The strength of the Quantity Surveyor will be to adjust high level
cost models at the feasibility stage to fit the budget and yet inform the design consultants
on the parameters of efficiencies, design factors, concepts and controlled quantities factors and
rates. This will be underlined with value management ethos as well as risk management
concepts.

5.2 Carbon Footprint

The first step in developing a carbon management strategy for buildings will be to accurately
measure the current level of carbon emissions – that will be your carbon footprint. Carbon
footprint is essential for building owners to set benchmarks to measure carbon performance and
to compare amongst other properties. These measurements would also enable building owners
to maximize energy efficiencies and returns through identification of
energy inefficient areas. (DLSC, 2008)
The carbon footprint for buildings includes embodied carbon and operational carbon.
The embodied carbon of a building are from the CO2 produced during the
manufacture of materials, their transport and assembly on site, maintenance and
replacement, disassembly and decomposition. Operational carbon is carbon
emissions due to the operations of the building. A typical carbon footprint of a building
would ideally include the following:
• Material development and preparation;
• Construction process (including transport);
• Disposal or ongoing occupational emissions from tenant occupiers; and
• Refurbishment and redevelopment.
Embodied carbon accounts for only 13-18% of the total carbon footprint of any construction
project (UNEP, 2007) which explains the rationale of initiatives focusing on
increasing energy efficiencies to curb operational carbon emissions. However, as
buildings become more energy efficient, the more important the embodied carbon becomes
as it would then make up a much greater percentage of a low-energy building‘s total lifetime
carbon footprint. (DLSC, 2008)

44
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

The Quantity Surveyors may add value via executing the role of a
cost and carbon management consultant through the integration of cost and carbon
footprint. With the an established methodology, the Quantity Surveyor will be
equipped to measure the carbon footprint as well as to create various carbon models for
different developments which are
similar to that of cost plans format. Costing benchmarks such as $/m2 GFA may be compared
against carbon benchmarks such as kg/m2 of CO2 with carbon offset factors for green cover
and carbon credits.

5.3 Life Cycle Costing / Life Cycle Assessment

The field of Life Cycle Costing (LCC) will grow in importance in the next few years and the
Quantity Surveyor, who is an expert in cost management, is in an excellent position to gear
itself for this role. LCC is a technique to establish the total cost of the building throughout its
functional lifespan. LCC can be used to produce ‗a spend profile of the building over its
anticipated life-span‘ (OGC, 2009) and the results can be used to assist the management in the
decision-making process to go green.
However, the accuracy of LCC analysis diminishes as it projects further in to the
future (OGC, 2009). Hence it is paramount that during the course of the analysis, the long term
assumptions made are accurate and realistic. For instance, throughout the
lifespan of a building, there will be ‗one-off‘ and ‗recurring‘ cost (OGC, 2009). It is of
importance for the management to appreciate the difference between the two costs as one-off
costs diminishes over time whereas the recurring costs are time dependent and
continue to be incurred throughout the lifespan of the building. In certain cases,
recurring costs can increase with time i.e. increased maintenance costs as equipment ages.
LCC could be applied to include environmental, social and sustainability analysis,
commonly known as Life Cycle Analysis (LCA). Life-cycle assessment is a holistic methodology
that attempts to quantify the environmental impacts of a product (or a larger system such as
a building) through all stages of its life, including extraction and processing
of the raw materials used to make it, manufacturing or construction impacts, operation and
maintenance, and eventual recycling or disposal (cradle to grave approach) (DLSC, 2008).
Please refer to the figure 3 for the LCA process flow.

Life Cycle Assessment - Cradle to Grave Approach

Cradle .'. ...- - - - Extent of LCA Study - - - - - . Grave

Beginning End
I Building Life I
I·-------;;...-----~'~,
I
I
I BUilding Operational
I Energy
Raw Matenal
Extraction
& Manufacture
I
I
I
- Repair & Refurbishment I
I

t_:_1lllI.lim&!IlI!I,.m-;I4l!l!l!I?i-_.U
4
I
I
I
I

~&~
Figure 3: Process flowchart for LCA, Cradle to Grave

45
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

5.4 Property Performance Reporting

The emphasis on energy efficiency and the changing demand of today‘s tenants
requires building owners to work their way through the existing performance measurement tools to
understand where they fail to meet new standards. In the first instance what is needed is an
assessment process that provides a clear gap analysis that takes the owner towards a balanced
improvement strategy.
There are Property Performance Reporting (PPR) systems that provide independent risk
assessments which measure and benchmark property performance against contemporary standards
and to provide strategic measures against international and industry standards, governments
reporting targets, property measurement norms and rating tools. These can be done on both a
property portfolio basis and individual building basis. The PPR represents the assessment of a
building's performance as an 'indexed rating' comprising of three corporate social responsibility
(triple bottom line) categories as follows below and in this way owners can compare the buildings
and how they are being managed so that the building retains value and remains competitive.
• Environmental Performance
• Social Equity Indicators
• Building Condition and Compliance
Part of the Quantity Surveyors‘ scope of work includes due diligence exercises or building
surveying and such PPR assessments would dovetail into our core competencies as well.

5.5 Green Building Rating Assessment

The prevalent use of green building rating systems such as LEED and Green Mark in international
projects has created new inroads for the quantity surveyor to exploit. Courses such as the LEED
Accredited Professional and the Green Mark Manager certification have been created to enhance
the understanding of the relevant Green Building rating system and environmentally sustainable
designs. With a greater understanding of the green building rating systems, the QS
would be able to in a better position to advice the Client both on the costing and sustainable
designs.

5.6 Building Information Model

Building Information Modeling (BIM) is an integral platform for the

management of information throughout the project lifespan. The BIM model is best suited
for use where visual presentation is required.
With the advancement in building information modelling (BIM) systems, the use of object
orientated CAD may be able to contain information such as Green Assessment
points, intelligent advice on usage, LCA with carbon, specifications and real time costing as well.
The other key advancement to note is the automatic generation of bills of quantities from
BIM, which is called Quantity Information Model (QIM). QIM relies on the data within BIM to
extract the relevant data and process into bills of quantities. The apparent advantage of utilizing
such systems would be a fundamental shift in the role of Quantity Surveyors to focus on
higher value added cost estimating activities. Therefore, it is pertinent that the
Quantity Surveyor has to come to grasp with the advancement in information technology to stay
relevant.

6. CONCLUSION

From the paper, we can conclude that there is immense potential for green buildings to grow due to
the endless list of environmental, economic and social benefits. Based on the research carried by
our offices in Australia, United States, and the other literature review, it is evident that green
buildings can be constructed with minimum incremental cost. This is further
reinforced by the World Green Building Council that green buildings can be constructed at a
premium of 0 to 2% by a team of educated team of professionals (Bowerbank, 2009).

Research has shown that a green building does not mean the incorporation of expensive high
46
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

technology green features e.g. photovoltaic system, green wall / roof, LED lightings and etc. Instead,
the results have highlighted and stressed the importance of green design that simply utilise the
natural layout of the site to attain energy efficiency and reduce wastage of
resources as proven by the fact that non-LEED buildings might even qualified for LEED
rating if the owner had sent the building in for verification.
Therefore, it is of utmost importance for the investors, developers, building owners and end
users to be aware of the potential benefits of green buildings so that they can demand the
construction industry to provide them with a healthier environmental to live in.
The impact of sustainable construction on the Quantity Surveyor is two fold.
One, new opportunities have been presented to the Quantity Surveyor who has the essential skill
set to thrive in the new roles such as green costing and carbon management. Two, the Quantity
Surveyor must be quick to respond to the challenges of sustainable construction and cater to the
changing requirements of Clients in order to safeguard its profession.
Sustainability is here to stay and shall be part of our culture and lives, let‘s ride this new
wave together

REFERENCES

Babaeva, Elena. (2009). Data dispels ‗green‘ building cost myths. U.S.: Nashville Business
Journal. Retrieved 27 May 2009 from
http://nashville.bizjournals.com/nashville/stories/2009/02/02/focus1.html.
Bowerbank, Andrew. (2009). Green Building Movement is Evolving
and Creating
Opportunities. Infrastructure and Construction Asia, 3 (9), 5-8.
Building and Construction Authority (BCA). (2009). $100 Million Green Mark
Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings (GMIS-EB). Singapore: Building and Construction
Authority. Retrieved 12 May 2009 from http://www.bca.gov.sg/GreenMark/gmiseb.html.
Bowman, Richard and Wills, John. (2008). Valuing Green: How Green Buildings
Affect Property Values and Getting the Valuation Method Right. Australia: Green Building
Council Australia.
Build Carbon Neutral,2009. About the Construction Carbon Calculator. Retrieved 9 July 2009 from
http://buildcarbonneutral.org/about.php
Cheam, J., 2009. Green Building Practices May Be Mandated. The Straits Times, 9 July. P.B16.
CIRIA. (2001). Sustainable Construction – Company Indicators. U.K.: Construction Industry
Research and Information Association (CIRA).
Davis Langdon and Seah Consultancy (DLSC). (2008). The Carbon index. A Davis Langdon
& Seah Consultancy Information Sheet: Executive Summaries for the practitioner, 8(4), 1-6.
Davis Langdon (Australia). (2007). The cost and benefit of achieving Green
Buildings. Australia: Davis Langdon.
Davis Langdon (Australia). (2008). Workplaces of the Future: Effective,
expressive & exciting. Australia: Davis Langdon.
Davis Langdon (Australia). (2009). The Blue Book: Accessible Knowledge for the Property
th
& Construction Industry. 11 Edn. Australia: Davis Langdon.
IMCSD (Inter-Ministerial Committee on Sustainable Development). (2009) A Lively
and Sustainable Singapore: Strategies for Sustainable Growth.
Singapore: Ministry of
Environment and Water Resources and Ministry of National Development.
Kats, G.H. (2003). Green Building Costs and Financial Benefits. USA:
Massachusetts Technology Collaborative.
Mattiessen, L.F. and Morris, Peter. (2004). Costing Green: A Comprehensive Cost Database and
Budgeting Methodology. U.S.: Davis Langdon.
Miller, Norm, Spivey, Jay and Florance, Andy. (2008). Does Green Pay Off? US: Burnham- Moores
Centre for Real Estate and CoStar.
Nelson, A.J. (2007). The Greening of U.S. Investment Real Estate – Market Fundamentals,
Prospects and Opportunities. RREEF Research, 57.
OGC (Office of Government Commerce). (2009). Life Cycle Costing. U.K.: HM Treasury.
Retrieved 8 May 2009 from
47
13th Pacific Association of Quantity Surveyors Congress (PAQS 2009)

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/implementing_plans_introduction_life_cycle_costing_.asp.

Prowler, Don. (2008). Whole Building Design. U.S.: Whole Building Design
Guide. Retrieved 30 May 2009 from http://www.wbdg.org/wbdg_approach.php.
RICS (Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors). (2005a). Green Value – Green buildings, growing
assets, Report. U.K: Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.
U.S. Green Building Council. (2002). An Introduction to the U.S. Green Building Council and
the LEEDTM Green Building Rating System. U.S.: U.S. Green Building
Council. Retrieved 5 May 2009 from
http://info.lu.farmingdale.edu/depts/met/solar/appendix4.ppt.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future, Report of the
World Commission on Environment and Development. General Assembly document
A/42/427, Development and International Co-operation: Environment. United Nations: New
York. Retrieved 5 May 2009 from http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm.

48