Journal of Environmental Management 197 (2017) 605e609

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

Research article

Development and validation of sustainability criteria of administrative

green schools in Iran
Hossein Meiboudi a, Akramolmolok Lahijanian a, *, Seyed Mohammad Shobeiri b,
Seyed Ali Jozi c, Reza Azizinezhad d
a
Department of Environmental Management, Faculty of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
b
Department of Environmental Education, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
c
Department of Environment, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
d
College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Environmental responsibility in school has led to the emergence of a variety of criteria to administer
Received 8 August 2016 green schools' contributions to sustainability. Sustainability criteria of administrative green schools need
Received in revised form validity, reliability and norms. The aim of the current study was to develop and validate assessment
16 March 2017
criteria for green schools in Iran based on the role of academia. A national survey was conducted to
Accepted 14 April 2017
obtain data on sustainability criteria initiatives for green schools and the Iranian profile was defined. An
initial pool of 71 items was generated and after its first edition, 63 items were selected to comprise the
sustainability criteria. Engineering-architectural and behavioral aspects of this sustainability criteria
Keywords:
Sustainability criteria
were evaluated through a sample of 1218 graduate students with environmental degrees from Iran's
Green schools universities. Exploratory factor analysis using principal components and promax rotation method
Exploratory factor analysis showed that these 9 criteria have simple structures and are consistent with the theoretical framework.
Iran The reliability coefficients of subscales ranged between 0.62 (participation) and 0.84 (building location
and position). The study's survey of correlation coefficients between items and subscales illustrated that
those coefficients varied between 0.24 and 0.68.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction been initiated worldwide (Henderson and Tilbury, 2004;

In the monitoring of national environmental and sustain-
ability issues, one of the main goals is to support decision making
processes, thus improving sustainability management and
achieving better development results. Despite the variety of
approaches and tools for measuring sustainability, criteria
almost always play a fundamental role. Sustainability criteria
are one possible way of ensuring that sustainability issues are
being consistently and transparently integrated into public and
private affairs. Criteria provide sustainability assessment mea-
surement, reporting, comparability and transparency to
stakeholders.
Nowadays, green school sustainability criteria practices have
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: links.state@gmail.com (H. Meiboudi), lahijanian.ak@gmail.
com (A. Lahijanian), sm_shobeiri@pnu.ac.ir (S.M. Shobeiri), sajozi@yahoo.com
(S.A. Jozi), r.azizi@srbiau.ac.ir (R. Azizinezhad).
Mogensen and Mayer, 2005). Eco-Schools is an international
program coordinated since 1994 by the international non-profit
organization, Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE). It
operates in 58 countries. FEE criteria for selecting Eco-Schools
include 11 criteria, consisting of waste management, waste
reduction, biodiversity, energy, water, transport, health, global
sustainability, healthy nutrition, citizenship and climate change
(FEE, 2016; Cincera and Krajhanzl, 2013). U.S. Green Building
Council (USGBC) launched The Leadership in Energy and Envi-
ronmental Design (LEED) 2009 Green Building Rating System for
Schools New Construction and Major Renovations, which ad-
dresses 50 items in 7 criteria: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency,
Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor Envi-
ronmental Quality, Innovation in Design and Regional Priority
(Chan et al., 2015).
BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental
Assessment Method), in the United Kingdom, addresses 10 criteria:
Management, Health and Well-Being, Energy, Transport, Water,
Material, Waste, Land Use and Ecology, Pollution and Innovation

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.04.045
0301-4797/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
606 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 197 (2017) 605e609
(BREG, 2008). Green Star Education v1 in Australia addresses 9
criteria: Management, Indoor Environmental Quality, Energy,
Transport, Water, Material, Land Use and Ecology, Emissions and
Innovation (GBCA, 2015). CSUS (China Society for Urban Studies) in
China addresses 6 criteria: Planning and Sustainable Site, Energy,
Material and Water, Indoor Environmental Quality, Management,
Education (CSUS, 2011).
Countries considering their own socioeconomic and cultural
characteristics must be able to adapt these criteria from generalities
and into their own particular circumstances (Datnow, 2005; Durlak
and DuPre, 2008). For example, climatic conditions in the Middle
East, where the temperature difference between day and night is
significantly wider, thus requiring a great deal of energy con-
sumption to make conditions livable, together with the sharp in-
crease in the utilization of fossil fuels that greatly contributes to air
pollution and raises the air temperature, have compelled local
people to find a solution to this grave problem (Mahdavinejad et al.,
2014). Therefore, it is necessary to establish sustainability criteria of
administrative green schools based on socioeconomic and cultural
background.
The need for comprehensive sustainability criteria becomes
evident when important public policy-making is decentralized to
communities. The aggregation of data from lower levels could lead
to a loss of accuracy and robustness in the analysis of particular
situations. As reported by Meiboudi et al. (2016), on a national
scale, the problems may be different, requiring tailored tools.
Additionally, with more focus on sustainability criteria across the
world, standardized criteria are one of the fundamental charac-
teristics of these features, and include validity, reliability and
norms. Thus, any rating based on any non-standard methods
lacking accuracy and efficiency would not contribute to advancing
the green school concept.
Developing sustainability criteria cannot be a purely scientific or
technical process; rather, it should be an open communication and
policy process (Ramos, 2009). Public participation, especially from
universities, is one of the principal components for designing and
implementing sustainability criteria sets, as stressed by several
authors (e.g. Ioris et al., 2008; Ramos, 2009; Ridsdale and Noble,
2016) The importance of participatory design becomes more
obvious on a national and regional scale, where the distances be-
tween experts, specialists and decision-makers overall are smaller
and the interaction can be comprehensive and more effective.
Academia has the expertise necessary to develop the intellectual
and conceptual framework to achieve a sustainable development
goal. Universities must play a significant role in the education,
research, policy formulation, information exchange and commu-
nity outreach required to create sustainability criteria on a national
scale.
As discussed, this study focuses on developing sustainability
criteria for the green school in Iran from 2 perspectives: (i) devel-
oping sustainability criteria for administrative green schools in Iran
based on role of academia; and (ii) assessing the adequacy of the
items for assessing and achieving the exploratory factor structure
embedded in the criteria.
2. Research methodology
The present study's goal is research and development, in both
technique and data gathering for a descriptive survey. The research
methodology was premised on the multitude of items that a green
school must accomplish to help participants meet the criteria
(Dautremont-Smith, 2012). With this understanding, question-
naires were formulated, pilot tested, and administered. The
framework of methodology is organized into 4 sections as dis-
cussed below.
2.1. Survey questionnaire
The questionnaire consisted of three main sections; the first
section covered respondent and personal data such as name,
gender, age and university. Section two is investigated 9 criteria
with related items. The respondents were asked to rate the
appropriateness of the items on a five-point priority scale ranging
from 1 (completely inappropriate) to 5 (completely appropriate).
The third section included the whole list of pooled and grouped
items. Again, the respondents were asked to identify the appro-
priateness score for each item, using the same five-point priority
scale previously introduced. At the end of each group of criteria, the
respondents were given the chance to add and rate any additional
items.
We administered questionnaire to a group of 1218 graduate
students with environmental degrees from Iranian universities. Of
32 universities in Iran with programs in environmental studies,
graduate students from 27 universities completed the question-
naire and submitted their responses within the time allotted. This
population size was chosen for the adequacy and appropriateness
of the item analysis and exploratory factor analysis.
2.2. Data acquisition
Researchers have reported several criteria for the adminis-
trative of green schools, which, despite their multiplicity,
convincingly converge in engineering-architectural and behav-
ioral aspects (Meiboudi et al., 2016). In this research, sustain-
ability criteria of administrative green schools in Iran was
developed based on 9 criteria, including building location and
position, indoor air criterion, green space, management, energy,
waste management, transportation, education and participation,
adopted from 5 different sustainability criteria for green schools
and their accordance with Iran's conditions. The selected green
school criteria are known and represent existing criteria well. In
this regard, the criteria provided by FEE (FEE, 2016), LEED
(USGBC, 2009), BREEAM Education 2008 (BREG, 2008), Green
Star Education v1 (GBCA, 2015) and CSUS (CSUS, 2011) were
used.
An initial pool of items was generated and 71 items were
selected with each item linked to one of the 9 above-mentioned
criteria. At first, with the aid of 9 professionals in the green
school scope via unstructured interviews, the initial refining took
place among the items selected. A professional is usually defined as
someone who has experience or skill in a particular job or activity
in administrative green schools. The outcome of this process led to
removing 8 items in the questionnaire and reaching a total of 63
items. From these items, the preliminary version of the sustain-
ability criteria on a national scale was built.
After the questionnaire was developed, the pilot study needed
to be conducted before the main survey. The aim of the pilot
study was to find out whether these questions were clear, how
long it took for the participants to finish, whether they answered
in a proper way, etc. It helped to identify some problems and
polish the final questionnaire. The pilot study to assess the ad-
equacy and suitability of the criteria's items were assigned to 50
graduate students with environmental degrees, who were asked
their opinions about the articulacy and directness of the
expression of these items among the criteria. During this stage,
the statement of changes saw several items added and syntax
stabilized. After this stage, it was necessary to implement the
criteria in large population groups to enable analysis and to
evaluate the engineering-architectural and behavioral aspects of
this sustainability criteria.
 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 197 (2017) 605e609 607

2.3. Data import
The data collected from the questionnaires was entered into v.
18 of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) (SPSS Inc,
2009). It should be noted that in the process of creating and
analyzing the data, a matrix of polychoric data were used in v. 8.5
Linear Structural Relations (LISREL) (Jo€ reskog, 1997).
of whether all parts of the questions had received responses. If it
appeared that random response patterns had been used, the
transpose method was employed. Subsequently, the data of 31 re-
spondents were excluded and sample size was reduced to 1187
people.
Step 6: Frequency analysis provided answers to questions.

Our analysis examined whether all parts of entire responses to

2.4. Exploratory data analysis
After data import, exploratory data analysis (Howell, 2007) was
performed, in the following steps:
Step 1: Match the input data with completed questionnaires.
For this purpose, about 5% of completed questionnaires were
randomly selected and were compared with data contained in the
input data file.
Step 2: Matching data with the questionnaire coding methods.
For a comprehensive review of the data and to ensure the ac-
curacy of data entry, given the frequency of responses to each
question of the questionnaire and in accordance the grading scales'
method, when an incorrect code was identified, it was discussed;
this helped to avoid unintentional incorrect entries to the data file.
At this stage, a few wrong codes were detected.
Step 3: Review and modification of code.
In some cases, the instructions for replacing the error code SPSS
were used to recode applications, as well as in cases of a systematic
mistake. To speed up the replacement of such files, written pro-
cedure codes were used. At the end of this stage, to ensure that
measures had been appropriately taken, the code was investigated.
When necessary, this process helped ensure that the error code was
performed.
Step 4: Analysis of missing data.
To survey for missing data, we performed measurements and
used a survey of the systematic relationships among these data,
considering the demographic characteristics of the sample group
and the specifications of the action items. When the average pro-
portion of missing data in each question was <1% and a regular
relationship wasn't observed, these data were replaced using
interpolation methods.
Step 5: Check the accuracy of the answers provided by the
respondents.
To verify that participants had responded to items, we took note
questions had been allocated with the appropriate frequency, or
whether doing so had led to severe skewness. Our survey of 71
items related to our sustainability criteria found that none of the
questions displayed this pattern.
Step 7: Survey exploratory factor structure and items analysis.
In this process, we used the data of the 1187 graduate students
in the sample group for items analysis. Mining exploratory factor
structure was also used.
3. Results
Respondents to the questionnaire numbered 623 males and 595
females. Approximately 82% of the sampled population was older
than 30 years, and hailed from different occupational categories
from each of Iran's 30 provinces.
During items analysis, a survey of histogram percentage, in-
dicators related to deviation, kurtosis, discrimination index and
difficulty index for the 71 items was conducted. At this level, all
items had positive correlation coefficient with score on total scale.
These findings mean that in this case, all items were in line with the
score of total scale. Cronbach's alpha coefficients in the total scale in
the present situation account for 0.86. Survey items based on the 7
criteria showed that 8 items from minimal required competences
were extraneous to the sustainability criteria.
Through the rule was adopted to remove items from our anal-
ysis, we determined that there were issues with 7 criteria. The
criteria included a) out of average item between 2.5 and 4.5; b)
standard deviation of less than 0.5; c) the standard score of tilt less
than 10; d) kurtosis standard score of higher than 10; e) correlation
coefficient score of item with corrected itemdtotal correlation less
than 0.10; f) squared multiple correlation less than 0.35; g) Cron-
bach's alpha coefficient less than 0.70 if the item was deleted.
Consequently, the remaining 63 items were retained for explor-
atory factor analysis and survey structure inside the scale.
Before carrying out factor analysis, we investigated normality
assumptions of data distribution, linearity relationships between
variables, absence of outlier variables and cases, absence of multi-
collinearity and singularity in the data and factorability data matrix.
Note that there is no need to produce an invertible matrix in
components analysis. As a result, multicollinearity did not pose a
fundamental problem to our analysis (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007);

Table 1
Components and total square of the loading obtained from the components analysis for green schools' sustainability criteria.

Factor Equity Variance explanation (%) Cumulative variance explanation (%) Eigenvalue

First 5.22 4.28 4.28 22.04

Second 5.20 4.15 8.43 9.12
Third 5.16 4.07 12.5 8.36
Fourth 4.86 3.82 16.32 5.14
Fifth 4.63 3.77 20.09 5.05
Sixth 4.52 3.26 23.35 3.97
Seventh 3.75 2.85 26.2 3.54
Eighth 3.48 2.62 28.82 2.16
Ninth 3.29 2.29 31.11 2.35
608 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 197 (2017) 605e609

Table 2
Descriptive findings items and coefficients internal consistency subscales criteria for administrative green schools.

Criteria Number Mean Standard Factor Alpha coefficient Correlation of items Alpha coefficient
of item deviation loading after removing with the score subscale

Building location 27 4.84 1.09 0.46 0.84 0.54 0.84

and position 10 4.75 1.58 0.34 0.74 0.63
35 4.48 1.55 0.51 0.75 0.46
44 3.45 1.42 0.41 0.72 0.57
34 3.22 1.36 0.74 0.81 0.39
17 3.83 1.25 0.57 0.83 0.48
47 4.39 1.30 0.48 0.70 0.34
Indoor air criterion 58 3.78 0.98 0.59 0.69 0.60 0.78
4 3.15 1.13 0.64 0.78 0.32
Green space 36 2.69 1.52 0.52 0.74 0.58 0.76
63 2.85 1.44 0.44 0.71 0.43
26 2.43 1.36 0.35 0.75 0.51
18 2.28 1.93 0.49 0.78 0.41
Management 43 3.39 1.25 0.38 0.81 0.40 0.74
11 3.45 1.03 0.53 0.71 0.62
59 4.15 1.71 0.37 0.71 0.58
5 3.63 1.46 0.52 0.77 0.63
46 4.76 1.49 0.35 0.75 0.42
33 3.19 1.38 0.62 0.67 0.56
61 3.82 1.67 0.36 0.63 0.46
1 3.73 1.94 0.62 0.72 0.49
60 4.69 1.50 0.56 0.78 0.55
62 4.67 1.14 0.65 0.79 0.41
Energy 28 2.95 1.05 0.43 0.70 0.68 0.72
48 3.67 1.33 0.60 0.68 0.32
21 2.55 1.84 0.36 0.77 0.66
25 2.83 1.64 0.52 0.72 0.32
9 3.37 1.49 0.61 0.63 0.47
45 3.36 1.25 0.42 0.75 0.48
54 3.28 1.87 0.48 0.71 0.42
42 2.75 1.39 0.39 0.73 0.35
Waste management 16 4.32 1.47 0.61 0.63 0.59 0.68
52 4.21 0.92 0.34 0.69 0.40
3 4.95 1.14 0.60 0.60 0.54
32 4.06 1.36 0.56 0.59 0.61
39 4.19 1.25 0.51 0.067 0.37
Transportation 19 3.30 1.47 0.45 0.71 0.52 0.65
50 3.54 1.58 0.56 0.63 0.27
6 4.94 1.69 0.44 0.73 0.36
37 4.28 1.95 0.46 0.68 0.31
55 3.49 1.03 0.54 0.66 0.57
12 3.24 1.85 0.32 0.70 0.29
57 2.84 1.41 0.72 0.76 0.34
Education 40 3.25 1.17 0.37 0.78 0.28 0.64
20 4.16 1.35 0.42 0.75 0.031
29 4.28 1.17 0.68 0.62 0.32
38 4.97 1 0.63 0.71 0.29
41 3.21 1.45 0.66 0.79 0.24
49 3.52 1.95 0.74 0.64 0.38
51 3.69 1.14 0.33 0.63 0.40
56 3.91 0.94 0.71 0.75 0.48
24 4.16 1.25 0.32 0.71 0.38
53 4.46 1.83 0.46 0.76 0.26
2 2.36 1.71 0.45 0.79 0.38
15 2.44 1.42 0.59 0.68 0.54
7 3.69 1.54 0.61 0.64 0.42
22 3.41 1.96 0.30 0.75 0.54
30 3.41 1.25 0.042 0.72 0.61
8 3.69 1.78 0.44 0.74 0.54
13 3.17 166 0.69 0.79 0.29
23 2.68 1.02 0.36 0.68 0.38
Participation 14 3.42 1.78 0.42 0.71 0.34 0.62
31 3.87 1.36 0.40 0.77 0.27

the survey kept the squared multiple correlation coefficients of the
items. Additionally, because all coefficients were lower than 0.80,
this showed that there was no problem in multicollinearity and
singularity in the data, either.
Furthermore, the index of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of
sampling adequacy (Kaiser, 1974) was equal to 0.91; the index of
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity (Kaiser, 1974) equaled 37620.72 with
7503 degrees of freedom. Therefore, at the level of 0.0001, our re-
sults were statistically significant. Consequently, in total, after as-
sumptions of factor analysis were identified, this analysis was
successfully performed on the data.
Performing exploratory factor analysis on the correlation matrix
polychoric outcome of the data from the sample group while using
possible factor finding method, various spins, various restrictions
 H. Meiboudi et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 197 (2017) 605e609
on the number of factors and the amount of variable loading,
showed that the principal component factor finding method, pro-
max iterations with Kaiser normalization, determined the number
of factors to be 9 and the minimum amount of loading in each item
on the factors to be 0.30. This analysis extracted factors with the
highest concordance with theoretical structure of the green
schools' sustainability criteria.
The results of factor analysis showed that the structure of the 9
criteria, with equity of greater than one in totality explained 31% of
the variance scale total, and is the most appropriate and the
simplest structure for these data. Table 1 provides the resulting
equity, variance explanation, cumulative variance explanation and
eigenvalues for factors. Note that this pattern was obtained after 16
rotations. To finalize a number of factors, we used a scree plot
(Cattell, 1978), and the amount of equity next extracted factors
available in this analysis.
The survey questionnaire component analysis for the adminis-
trative green schools showed 9 criteria related to the use
engineering-architectural aspects: building location and position (7
items), indoor air criterion (2 items), green space (4 items) and
behavioral aspects: management (10 items), energy (8 items),
waste management (5 items), transportation (7 items), education
(18 items) and participation (2 items). The items related to each
criterion are presented in the appendix at the end of this article.
Table 2 shows that all subscales meet the appropriate co-
efficients' internal consistency and range between 0.62 (participa-
tion) and 0.84 (building location and position). In addition, the
survey of correlation analysis between items and the subscales
show that the coefficients are valued between 0.24 (item 41) and
0.68 (item 28). On the other hand, the alpha coefficient has been
removed for any item compared to other items in the subscales
which do not show a significant difference.
4. Conclusions
Sustainability criteria of administrative green schools need
validity, reliability and norms; on the other hand, much criticism
has been levied against standardized criteria and their re-
quirements for not addressing national issues and goals. To achieve
this objective, reasonable and fair comprehensive sustainability
criteria of administrative green schools should be established. The
sustainability criteria would be selected based on their utility for
enabling meaningful benchmarking between schools.
The graduate students who participated in our study are
beginning to realize that in many sustainable initiatives, it can play
an important role, giving credibility and scientific and technical
support. It can also contribute to increasing public participation,
helping to generate consensus and commitment from the sus-
tainability involved.
Development and validation of sustainability criteria for green
school may help remedy their weaknesses by increasing capacity
for managing effective criteria, improving brand recognition,
facilitating benchmarking, and reducing duplication of effort
within the green school community. This article develops and
validates sustainability criteria of administrative green schools in
Iran based on role of academia, which will lead the whole society to
a deeper understanding of green schools, and will promote the
development and construction of green schools on a wider scale.
This sustainability criteria, adapted in Iran, encourages an in-
tegrated design approach, with a national survey for engineering-
architectural aspects and behavioral aspects deemed to improve
609
sustainability, utilizing 63 items, including building location and
position, indoor air criterion, green space, management, energy,
waste management, transportation, education and participation.
The significance of Bartlett's sphericity test demonstrated that the
matrix items located in the system are strong ties and suitable,
which can lead to the extraction of components of the data matrix.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.04.045.
References
British Research Establishment Global (BREG), 2008. BRE Environmental and Sus-
tainability Standard: BREEAM Education 2008 Assessors Manual. BREEAM, UK,
London.
Cattell, R.B., 1978. The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis. Plenum Press, New York.
Chan, T.C., Mense, E.G., Lane, K.E., Richardson, M.D., 2015. Marketing the Green
School: Form, Function, and the Future. IGI Global, Hershey, PA. http://
dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-6312-1.
Cincera, J., Krajhanzl, J., 2013. Eco-Schools: what factors influence pupils' action
competence for pro-environmental behavior? J. Clean. Prod. 61, 117e121. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.030.
China Society for Urban Studies (CSUS), 2011. In: Green Building. China Architecture
and Building Press, Beijing.
Datnow, A., 2005. The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in
changing district and state contexts. Educ. Adm. Quart. 41, 121e153. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04269578.
Dautremont-Smith, J., 2012. School Sustainability Rating Systems: Strengths, Lim-
itations, and Future Prospects. University of Michigan. M.S. dissertation. http://
hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90923 (Accessed 18 December 2015).
Durlak, J.A., DuPre, E., 2008. Implementation matters: a review of research on the
influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting
implementation. Am. J. Commun. Psychol. 41, 327e350. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0.
Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE), 2016. International Eco-schools
Programme. http://www.eco-schools.org/page.php?id¼52 (Accessed 18
December 2015).
Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA), 2015. Green Schools. http://www.gbca.
org.au/uploads/Green%20Schools_Lowres.pdf (Accessed 18 December 2015).
Henderson, K., Tilbury, D., 2004. Whole-school Approaches to Sustainability: an
International Review of Whole-school Sustainability Programs. Australian
Government, Canberra.
Howell, D.C., 2007. Statistical Methods for Psychology, sixth ed. Duxbury Press,
Belmont, California.
Ioris, A.A., Hunter, C., Walker, S., 2008. The development and application of water
management sustainability indicators in Brazil and Scotland. J. Environ. Manag.
88, 1190e1201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.06.007.
€reskog, K.G., 1997. LISREL 8: User's Reference Guide. SSI. Software International,
Jo
Chicago.
Kaiser, H.F., 1974. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39, 31e36. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575.
Mahdavinejad, M., Zia, A., Larki, A.N., Ghanavati, S., Elmi, N., 2014. Dilemma of green
and pseudo green architecture based on LEED norms in case of developing
countries. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 3, 235e246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijsbe.2014.06.003.
Meiboudi, H., Lahijanian, A., Shobeiri, S.M., Jozi, S.A., Azizinezhad, R., 2016. Creating
an integrative assessment system for green schools in Iran. J. Clean. Prod. 119,
236e246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.004.
Mogensen, F.R., Mayer, M. (Eds.), 2005. ECO-schools: Trends and Divergences: a
Comparative Study on ECO-school Development Processes in 13 Countries.
Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Vienna.
Ramos, T.B., 2009. Development of regional sustainability indicators and the role of
academia in this process: the Portuguese practice. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 1101e1115.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.02.024.
Ridsdale, D.R., Noble, B.F., 2016. Assessing sustainable remediation frameworks
using sustainability principles. J. Environ. Manag. 184, 36e44. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.015.
SPSS Inc, 2009. SPSS Statistical Algorithms. SPSS Inc., Chicago.
Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., 2007. Using Multivariate Statistics, sixth ed. Pearson
PLC, London.
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), 2009. LEED 2009 for Schools New Construc-
tion and Major Renovations Rating System. Washington, DC. http://www.usgbc.
org/Docs/Archive/General/Docs5547.pdf (Accessed 18 December 2015).