The movement of green building was started after the Agenda21. International Council for Research and

Innovation in Building and Construction highlighted the main challenges that sustainable development presents to

the construction industry. The Agenda had an important role in the creation of green assessment tools in building

industry. An international project coordinated from Canada namely GB Tool (Green Building Tool) was the first

attempt to develop green rating tool. The awareness has emerged the implementation of various rating tools such

as LEED, CASBEE, BREEAM and GreenMark developed by the United States of America, Japan, United Kingdom and Singapore respectively. Many rating systems can be developed in different regions that lookquite different, but

share a common methodology and set of terms. In Malaysia, a new set of rating tool was developed by the Real Estate and Housing Developers Association (REHDA) known as GreenRE. This paper reviews the GreenRE and compare it with GreenMark and BREEAM. Since the latter were more established, this paper will study strengths, weaknesses, gaps and issue within the GreenRE. With the outcome of this study, it may help both the authority and industry-players to prepare a comprehensive assessment tool that suit to local practice

Fadhilah, Che Aziz

Halmi, Zainol

Haryati, Mohd Isa

Muhamad Asri, Abdullah Kamar

Suharto, Teriman

English

Universiti Teknologi MARA Institutional Repository

  
 
 
Proceedings of Postgraduate Conference on Global Green Issues (Go Green),UiTM (Perak), Malaysia, 7-8 October 2015 
305 
 
 
Reviewon Malaysia’s GreenRE in Comparison with Singapore’s 
GreenMark and UK’s BREEAM 
 
Halmi Zainol
1
, Fadhilah Che Aziz
2
,  Suharto Teriman
3
, Haryati Mohd Isa
4
, Muhamad Asri Abdullah Kamar
5
 
1,2,3,4,5
Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA (Perak), Malaysia,  
Email: halmi461@perak.uitm.edu.my, fadhilahaziz81@gmail.com, suhar429@perak.uitm.edu.my, 
harya966@perak.uitm.edu.my, masri418@perak.uitm.edu.my 
 
 
Abstract 
 
The movement of green building was started after the Agenda21. International Council for Research and 
Innovation in Building and Construction highlighted the main challenges that sustainable development presents to 
the construction industry. The Agenda had an important role in the creation of green assessment tools in building 
industry. An international project coordinated from Canada namely GB Tool (Green Building Tool) was the first 
attempt to develop green rating tool. The awareness has emerged the implementation of various rating tools such 
as LEED, CASBEE, BREEAM and GreenMark developed by the United States of America, Japan, United 
Kingdom and Singapore respectively. Many rating systems can be developed in different regions that lookquite different, but 
share a common methodology and set of terms. In Malaysia, a new set of rating tool was developed by the Real Estate and 
Housing Developers Association (REHDA) known as GreenRE. This paper reviews the GreenRE and compare it with 
GreenMark and BREEAM. Since the latter were more established, this paper will study strengths, weaknesses, gaps and issue 
within the GreenRE. With the outcome of this study, it may help both the authority and industry-players to prepare a 
comprehensive assessment tool that suit to local practice. 
 
Keywords:Greenrating tool; Assessment; GreenRE; 
 
 
1.  Introduction 
 
The establishment of green building rating tools such as LEED, BREEAM and GreenMark has contributed to the 
vast movement of high performance building (Kibert, 2008). The policies may be either compulsory or voluntary 
or a mix of both for building sectors in these countries. Each of these programs ultimately lead to a certification 
which requires precise fulfillment of all terms and processes stipulated in the program’s documents (Ahankoob, 
Morshedi& Rad, 2013). In Malaysia, REHDA, a non-profit organization has developed a rating tool namely 
GreenRE.GreenRE incorporates internationally recognized best practices to provide the industry with a more 
efficient and practical green tool (GreenRE.org, 2014). Therefore a comparison review of GreenRE with two (2) 
international rating tools is pivotal to set a milestone of comprehensive green rating tool in Malaysia. “Building 
environmental systems must reflect national, regional and local differences if they are to be accepted and used” 
(Todd &Geissler 1999,Todd& Lindsey, 2000).Hence, Singapore’s GreenMark has similar weather condition, 
social and cultural value, therefore a comparison of Malaysia’s GreenRE to Singapore’s GreenMark is crucial. 
Due to the oldest established green rating tool in the world, as a comparison to the UK’s BREEAM is a necessity. 
 
GreenRE was introduced in 2013 in Malaysia after four (4) years Green Building Index (GBI) is implemented. 
The GreenRE attempts to set a whole new assessment tool for sustainable building. To date, the GreenRE has 
three (3) components of assessment according to building type, namely 1) Existing Non-Residential Building 
(ENRB)  2) Non-Residential Building (NRB) and 3) Residential Building (RES).  
 
The Green Mark assessment program was developed by the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) of 
Singapore in January 2005 to promote sustainability in the construction industry and raise environmental 
awareness among stakeholders of a project. It was modeled after the same schemes adopted in countries such as 
USA’s LEED and Australia’s GBAS. GreenMark Program evaluates both residential and non-residential 
buildings (new or existing) to measure their performance in terms of sustainability and identify the impact of 
building on the environment. 
 
The Building Research Establishment Environment Assessment Method (BREEAM) is one of the world's leading 
and most widely used environmental assessment method for buildings. It was launched in United Kingdom  in 
1990. The main function of this assessment tools are primarily on building specification evaluation including the 
design, construction and use (BREEAM, 2013). BREEAM sets the standard for best practice in sustainable design 
and claims to have become the de-facto measure used to describe a building's environmental performance 
  
 
 
Proceedings of Postgraduate Conference on Global Green Issues (Go Green),UiTM (Perak), Malaysia, 7-8 October 2015 
306 
 
 
(Aspinall,Sertyesilisik, Sourani, &Tunstall, 2013). BREEAM offers assessments of buildings outside the UK. 
Malaysia is not exception. In March 2014, Construction Industry Development Board or CIDB of Malaysia has 
signed the memorandum of understanding (MoU) with BRE to collaborate in developing sustainability 
assessment tools and certification schemes.  
 
2.0 Green Building And Sustainable Background 
 
The concept of green building refers to a structure that attempts to consume zero energy and has a minimum 
negative impact on the environment. A remarkable growth in the advanced construction techniques has intensified 
significantly the needs for having sustainable buildings. Many countries have taken notable steps in this area. 
These steps have led to introducing sustainable assessment tools. Assessment tool is an initiative by building 
construction interest-group for certifying, designing and constructing sustainable buildings. It seeks to quantify 
sustainability by way of subjective scoring against a set of criteria. It involves many parties to develop a 
comprehensive checklist and guidelines for architect, designer and developer in order to achieve green building 
certification. Over the years, assessment tools have successfully created awareness among clients to pursue 
sustainable buildings. 
 
In Malaysia, it started in 2005 with the Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water also known as Less 
Energy Office (LEO), located in Putrajaya. The LEO building’s aim is to set exemplary energy efficiency office 
building by using 50% less energy consumption than new conventional offices (GBI, 2014). As a result, it 
received its recognition through the 2006 ASEAN Energy Award (Hong, Chiang, Shapiro,& Clifford,   
2007).Then in 2007, Malaysia’s Green Energy Office also known as GEO building was built in Bandar BaruBangi, 
Selangor. It has successfully reduces the energy consumption by 30% compare to the LEO building. When the 
GBI was launched in 2009, the GEO building was the first building certified. Both buildings are the showcases of 
successful green buildings in Malaysia. 
 
3.0Parameters of Assessment Tools (Non-Residential New Construction) 
 
The assessment parameters are varies from GreenRE, GreenMark and BREAM (UK). Six assessment categories 
are required for GreenRE, 5 categories for GreenMark and 9 categories for BREEM (UK).  In terms of assessment 
marks for each tool are also different from one another. GreenRE needs 164 marks, GreenMark 190 marks and 
BREEAM (UK) only required 100 marks for evaluation. Assessment categories and marks as follows; 
 
3.1 Green RE 
 
Six (6) categories in GreenRE carry maximum of 164 marks divided by percentage as follows: 
1) Energy Efficiency;   60% 
2) Water Efficiency;    8.5% 
3) Environmental Protection;    19.5% 
4) Indoor Environmental Quality;   5% 
5) Other Green Features and;    4.5% 
6) Carbon Footprint of Development.    2.5% 
 
3.2 Green Mark 
 
Five (5) key criteria in GreenMark weigh 190 marks which isdivided into percentage as follows:  
 
1) Energy Efficiency;   61% 
2) Water Efficiency;    9% 
3) Environmental Protection;   22% 
4) Indoor Environmental Quality, and;  4.3% 
5) Other Green Features    3.7% 
  
 
 
Proceedings of Postgraduate Conference on Global Green Issues (Go Green),UiTM (Perak), Malaysia, 7-8 October 2015 
307 
 
 
3.3 Breeam (UK) 
 
Nine (9) key categories in UK’s BREEAM carries 100 marks which weighed are as follow: 
 
1) Management;    12% 
2) Health and Wellbeing;    15% 
3) Energy;     19% 
4) Transport;    8% 
5) Water;     6% 
6) Materials;    12.5% 
7) Waste;      7.5% 
8) Land Use and Ecology, and;   10% 
9) Pollution    10% 
 
 
GreenRE   GreenMark    BREEAM 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Score Rating  Score Rating  Score Rating 
90 and above GreenRE Platinum  90 and above GreenMark Platinum  > 85 Outstanding 
85 < 90 GreenRE Gold  85 < 90 GreenMark Gold Plus  > 69 Excellent 
75 < 85 GreenRE Silver  75 < 85 GreenMark Gold   > 54 Very Good 
50 < 75 GreenRE Bronze  50 < 75 GreenMark Certified  > 44 Good 
      > 29 Pass 
      < 30 Unclassified 
 
Figure 1:  Percentage of award rating for each category in the GreenRE, GreenMark and BREEAM 
 
From the charts above show GreenRE has similar weightage percentage to GreenMark. Both carriesa high 
percentage for Energy Efficiency category. However, BREEAM has a more balanced distribution among all 
categories. In terms of award rating, GreenRE and GreenMark have the exact method for score and rating. Both 
are award rating by the sum of score for all categories, while BREEAM uses percentage. Therefore, GreenRE and 
GreenMark can be consider fair compare to BREEAM. For example, to be awarded GreenRE Platinum, a building 
should score  from 90 points to 164 points. For GreenMark’s Platinum, the same building should score from 90 
points to 190 points. Meanwhile in BREEAM, the highest rating is the Outstanding Award; between 90% to 100% 
score. In one perspective, GreenRE and GreenMark are both new rating tools in the country of origin. Perhaps the 
intention to promote awareness and encouragement for building owners to build sustainable buildings to meet the 
quality and healthy environment.BREAMwhich was implemented for nearly 25 years, therefore the purpose is to 
maintain sustainable buildings and with such method provides feedforward to building owner.  
 
4.0  Mapping Of GreenRE to GreenMark And BREEAM 
 
Although the assessment parameters are vary from GreenRE, GreenMark and BREEAM (UK), however several 
categories are similar as shown in Table 1. 
 
  
  
 
 
Proceedings of Postgraduate Conference on Global Green Issues (Go Green),UiTM (Perak), Malaysia, 7-8 October 2015 
308 
 
 
Table 1: Mapping on categories  betweenGreenRE, GreenMark and BREEAM 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.1 Comparison GreenRE to GreenMark 
 
Five (5) of GreenRE categories are similar to GreenMark namely Energy Efficiency, Water Efficiency, 
Environmental Protection, Indoor Environmental Quality and Other Green Features while GreenMark does not 
have category no. 6 in GreenRE namely Carbon Footprint of Development. The percentages of the categories are 
almost the same. 
 
4.2 Comparison GreenRE to BREEAM 
 
Two (2) of GreenRE categories are similar to three (3) categories in the BREEAM namely, Energy Efficiency, 
Water Efficiency and Health & Wellbeing. However, the percentages of the categories are significant difference 
especially in Energy categories. The major loopholes in GreenRE as compare to BREEAM are the Management, 
Transport, Materials, Waste, Land Use and Ecology and Pollution.  
 
Table 2, 3 and 4 summarize the similarity of green policies in each category for GreenRE, GreenMark and 
BREEAM. 
 
4.2.1 Energy Efficiency(EE)  
 
Table 2: Comparison on Energy Efficiency 
Green Policies GreenRE GreenMark BREEAM (UK) 
Monitoring And Measuring 
Performance  
 √ √ 
Providing Renewable Energy  √ √ √ 
Enhanced Commissioning    √ 
Refrigerant Management  √ √ √ 
Reduced Energy Use  √ √ √ 
Emissions Reduction Reporting    √ 
Energy Efficient Lighting 
Systems  
 √ √ 
Electrical Sub-Metering   √ √ 
Artificial Lighting  √ √ √ 
 
Even though Energy Efficiency category is the highest score with 60% in GreenRE,  the green policies cover by 
GreenRE are only four (4) namely, 1) providing renewable energy, 2) refrigerant management, 3) reduced energy 
GreenMark GreenRE BREEAM (UK) 
1) Energy Efficiency (61%) 1) Energy Efficiency (60%) 3) Energy 
(19%) 
2) Water Efficiency (9%) 2) Water Efficiency (8.5%) 5) Water (6%) 
 
3) Environmental Protection  
(22%) 
 
3) Environmental Protection 
(19.5%) 
2) Health  
and Wellbeing 
(15%) 
4) Indoor Environmental Quality 
(4.3%) 
 
4) Indoor Environmental 
Quality (5%) 
 
5) Other Green Features (3.7%) 5) Other Green Features 
(4.5%) 
1) Management 
 6) Carbon Footprint of 
Development 
4) Transport 
  6) Materials 
  7) Waste 
  8) Land Use 
and Ecology 
  9) Pollution 
  
 
 
Proceedings of Postgraduate Conference on Global Green Issues (Go Green),UiTM (Perak), Malaysia, 7-8 October 2015 
309 
 
 
use and 4) artificial lighting. This mainly caused by major difference in construction practices, building 
regulations and infrastructure. 
 
4.2.2 Water Efficiency (WE) 
 
Table 3: Comparison on Water Efficiency 
Green Policies GreenRE GreenMark 
 
BREEAM 
(UK) 
Water Conservation  
 
 √  √ 
Cooling Tower Water 
Management  
 
√ √   
Monitoring Regularly and 
Leak Detection  
 
√ √  √ 
Water Efficient 
Landscaping  
 
√ √   
Innovation for Reducing 
Water Use  
 
  √ 
Application of Water 
Efficient Fittings  
 
√ √  √ 
Leading in applying 
Advanced Wastewater 
Technologies  
 
  √ 
Minimizing indoor 
plumbing  
 
   
 
Water Efficiency category shows gaps in GreenRE, GreenMark and BREEAM. GreenRE covers four (4) areas in 
green policies namely, 1) cooling tower water management, 2) monitoring regularly and leak detection, 3) water 
efficiency landscape and 4) application of water efficiency fittings. This mainly caused by climate and 
construction practices.  
 
4.2.3 Indoor Air Quality and Environmental Protection (IAQ) 
  
Table 4:Comparison on Indoor Air Quality and Environmental Protection 
Green Policies GreenRE GreenMark BREEAM (UK) 
Indoor air quality development   √ √ 
Outdoor air delivery monitoring   √  
Low-Emitting Materials  √ √ √ 
Indoor Chemical and Pollutant 
Source Control  
√  √ 
Controllability of Systems  
 
   
Thermal comfort monitoring  
 
 √  
Daylight and views  
 
 √ √ 
Thermal Comfort  
 
√ √ √ 
Noise Level  
 
√ √ √ 
Increased ventilation  
 
√  √ 
Construction Indoor Air Quality 
Management Plan 
  √ 
 
IAQ category shows major gaps in GreenRE. GreenRE covers five (5) areas in green policies namely, 1) 
low-emitting materials, 2) indoor chemical and pollutant source control, 3) thermal comfort, 4) noise level and 5) 
increased ventilation. This mainly caused by construction materials and construction practices. 
 
5.0 Contribution To The Industry 
 
GreenRE isaquick win tool in green building assessment. It has some key principles of green building that  can 
give motivation to client, developer and designer to build green buildings. The industry can benefit from GreenRE 
tool to promote their building to the public and increase selling value. However, GreenRE shall benchmarks 
  
 
 
Proceedings of Postgraduate Conference on Global Green Issues (Go Green),UiTM (Perak), Malaysia, 7-8 October 2015 
310 
 
 
BREEAM to their standards since BREEAM has set milestone in rating tool worldwide whereby they offer rating 
for buildings outside the UK. It is a good shift to move our construction quality to an international standard 
(ZuhairuseMdDarus, Nor AtikahHashim, Elias Salleh, Lim Chin Haw, Abdul Khalim Abdul Rashid 
&SitiNurhidayah Abdul Manan, 2009).Two of the factors to benchmark any international rating tools is the local 
construction practices and building regulations. Therefore, with comprehensive rating tool framework, a local 
building can be certified by to  BREEAM by using national building regulations. The building can recognize 
internationally with concern of local context. Furthermore, the industry can benefit from BRE’s knowledge and 
expertise, best practice sharing and less resources required. 
 
6.0 Conclusions 
 
GreenRE is currently behind GreenMark and BREEAM in term of the categories covered. Significant gaps appear 
between GreenRE and BREEAM in six (6) areas such as Management, Materials, Transport, Waste, Land Use 
and Ecology and Pollution. Nevertheless, in three (3) categories similar to GreenRE and BREEAM, GreenRE still 
have major loopholes in green policies for each category. GreenRE has Innovation criteria as GreenMark but 
locate it in Other Green Features. However, there are two (2) categories in GreenRE do not cover in BREEAM and 
GreenMark such as Other Green Features and Carbon Footprint of Development. GreenRE has a long way to go to 
be a comprehensive assessment tool in Malaysia and in the region. Therefore, these areas are suggested to be 
studied in future research in term of their relevancy in Malaysia’s practice for current and future implementation.  
 
7.0 References 
  
Ahankoob A., Morshedi S.R.E., & Rad, K.G (2013).A Comprehensive Comparison between LEED and BCA 
Green Mark as Green Building Assessment Tools, The International Journal Of Engineering And Science 
(IJES), 2 (7):  31-38. 
Aspinall, S., Sertyesilisik, B., Sourani, Amr.&Tunstall., A   (2013). How Accurately Does Breeam Measure 
Sustainability?, Creative Education, 3, 1-8.  
BREEAM New Construction Non Domestic Buildings Technical Manuals SD5073-2:0:2011 
(http://www.breeam.org) 
Hong, W., Chiang, M.S., Shapiro, R.A. & Clifford, M. S. (2007). Building Energy Efficiency: Why Green 
Buildings Are Key To Asia’s Future. 
Kilbert, C.J., (2012). Sustainable Construction: Green Building and Delivery, 3
rd
 Edition, John Wiley and Sons, 
USA. 
GBI Assessment Criteria for Non Residential New Construction (NRNC), Green Building Index, April 2009. 
GreenRE Design Reference Guide Non-Residential Building NRB v1.2, REHDA (http://www.greenre.org) 
Todd, J.A. and Geissler, S., (1999).Regional and Cultural Issues in Environmental Performance Assessment for 
Buildings. Building Research & Information, 27 (4/5),  247-256. 
Todd, J.A., &  Lindsey, G., (2000). Comparative Assessment of GBC 2000 and LEED: Lessons learned for 
international and national system. International Conference Sustainable Building, 22-25 October, 
Maastricht, Netherland 
ZuhairuseMdDarus, Nor AtikahHashim, Elias Salleh, Lim Chin Haw, Abdul Khalim Abdul Rashid 
&SitiNurhidayah Abdul Manan (2009). Development of Rating System For Sustainable Building in Malaysia, 
WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development, 3(4), 260-272. 
 


Reviewon Malaysia’s GreenRE in comparison with Singapore’s

GreenMark and UK’s BREEAM / Halmi Zainol ... [et al.]

http://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/32753/1/32753.pdf

Reviewon Malaysia’s GreenRE in comparison with Singapore’s GreenMark and UK’s BREEAM / Halmi Zainol ... [et al.]

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Universiti Teknologi MARA Institutional Repository