Assessment of Site Development Compliance with GBC Indonesia Greenship Criteria in a Technology Office Complex
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26877/asset.v8i2.2452Keywords:
Green Building Council, Greenship Assessment, Sustainable Site Development, Environmental Rating ToolsAbstract
The increasing demand for land in urban development highlights the urgent need for sustainable construction practices. While green building concepts have gained global traction, the application of appropriate site development remains understudied in the Indonesian context. This study evaluates the implementation of the Appropriate Site Development (ASD) category based on the Greenship New Building v1.2 rating tool developed by the Green Building Council Indonesia (GBCI), using the Techno Building at the BRI IT Center in Jakarta as a case study. A descriptive-evaluative method was applied to assess compliance across seven criteria within the ASD category. Initial findings revealed a score of 12 out of 17 possible points, with deficiencies identified in public transportation (1/2 points), bicycle facilities (0/2), and microclimate (1/3). After proposing improvements, such as shuttle services, bicycle parking, and the use of high-albedo materials, the building achieved full compliance with 17/17 points. These results indicate that although external constraints exist (e.g., regulatory and geographic limitations), internal strategies can substantially improve green building certification outcomes. The study highlights the critical role of early site planning and internal design adjustments in achieving sustainability benchmarks.
References
[1] T. Röck et al., “Embodied GHG emissions of buildings – The hidden challenge for effective climate change mitigation,” Applied Energy, vol. 258, p. 114107, Jan. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114107
[2] Y. Chadirin, M. K. Anwar, and R. Fadillah, “Analysis of Compliance with Green Building Based on Greenship of Existing Building: Case Study of Delta Building,” in IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 1359, no. 1, p. 012040, Jun. 2024.
[3] Y. Liang et al., “Decarbonization potentials of the embodied energy use and operational process in buildings: A review from the life-cycle perspective,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 10, p. 21, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20190.
[4] J. M. Ongpeng and M. V. Umali, “Life-cycle assessment of concrete hollow blocks and autoclaved aerated concrete blocks,” in Life-Cycle of Structures and Infrastructure Systems, CRC Press, 2023, pp. 3166–3173.
[5] C. K. Purchase et al., “Circular Economy of Construction and Demolition Waste: A Literature Review on Lessons, Challenges, and Benefits,” Materials, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–25, 2022.
[6] H. Gao, X. Wang, K. Wu, Y. Zheng, Q. Wang, W. Shi, and M. He, “A Review of Building Carbon Emission Accounting and Prediction Models,” Buildings, vol. 13, no. 7, Art. 1617, Jun. 26, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13071617
[7] E. M. Ojo-Fafore, C. Aigbavboa, W. Thwala, and P. Remaru, “Green finance for sustainable global growth: costs and benefits of green buildings compared with conventional buildings,” in Research Anthology on Environmental and Societal Well-Being Considerations in Buildings and Architecture, IGI Global, 2021, pp. 373–393.
[8] Z. Liu and A. Guo, “Application of Green Building Materials and Multi-objective Energy-Saving Optimization Design,” Int. J. Heat Technol., vol. 39, no. 1, 2021.
[9] P. Caroli, “Diversecitysm: Matching Vitruvius’s De Architectura and the Jonasian Ecological Imperative,” MAJ–Malays. Archit. J., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 193–205, 2025.
[10] W. S. E. Ismaeel, “Sustainable site selection using system dynamics; case study LEED-certified project,” Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 368–386, 2022, doi: 10.1080/17452007.2021.1889955.
[11] E. C. Eze, R. A. Ugulu, O. P. Onyeagam, and A. A. Adegboyega, “Determinants of sustainable building materials (SBM) selection on construction projects,” Int. J. Constr. Supply Chain Manag., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 166–194, 2021.
[12] Y. Xiang, Y. Chen, J. Xu, and Z. Chen, “Research on sustainability evaluation of green building engineering based on artificial intelligence and energy consumption,” Energy Reports, vol. 8, pp. 11378–11391, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2022.08.266.
[13] J. Oh, W. Wong, D. Castro‑Lacouture, and J. Lee, “Indoor environmental quality improvement in green building: Occupant perception and behavioral impact,” Journal of Building Engineering, vol. 69, Art. 106314, Mar. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.106314
[14] O. Yee Sin, N. Yusof, and A. Osmadi, “Challenges of green office implementation: A case study in Penang, Malaysia,” International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 153–163, 2021, doi: 10.30880/ijscet.2021.12.01.015.
[15] S. Saha, R. Hiremath, and P. Sanjay, “Barriers to adoption of green buildings–a review,” Cardiometry, no. 22, pp. 377–385, 2022.
[16] K. Agyekum, E. Adinyira, and G. Ampratwum, “Factors driving the adoption of green certification of buildings in Ghana,” Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 595–613, 2020, doi: 10.1108/SASBE-02-2019-0017.
[17] R. Garg, R. Chhikara, R. Singh, G. Agrawal, V. Talwar, and V. Mehra, “A qualitative study to understand the factors affecting the adoption of glass fiber-reinforced gypsum (GFRG) as a sustainable building technology: insights from Indian construction industry,” Construction Innovation, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 321–344, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1108/CI-12-2019-0153.
[18] R. S. Abdulsalam, M. Chan, M. A. N. Masrom, and A. H. Nawawi, “Benefits and Challenges of Implementing Green Building Development in Nigeria,” Built Environment Project and Asset Management, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 399–413, 2024, doi: 10.1108/bepam-09-2022-0143.
[19] Obinna Iwuanyanwu, Ifechukwu Gil-Ozoudeh, Azubuike Chukwudi Okwandu, and Chidiebere Somadina Ike, “The role of green building materials in sustainable architecture: Innovations, challenges, and future trends,” International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences, vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 1935–1950, 2024, doi: 10.51594/ijarss.v6i8.1476.
[20] A. Orsi, I. Guillén-Guillamón, and E. Pellicer, “Optimization of green building design processes: Case studies within the European union,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1–16, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12062276.
[21] C. Wang et al., “The evolution and future directions of green buildings research: A scientometric analysis,” Buildings, vol. 14, no. 2, p. 345, 2024.
[22] B. G. Hwang, J. Ngo, and J. Z. K. Teo, “Challenges and strategies for the adoption of smart technologies in the construction industry: The case of Singapore,” J. Manag. Eng., vol. 38, no. 1, p. 05021014, 2022.
[23] N. Sarpin, A. S. Hasan, and M. A. M. Iskak, “Competency requirement for project manager in improving sustainable construction project success,” Int. J. Sustain. Constr. Eng. Technol., vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 311–321, 2021.
[24] A. M. Alsaadi, A. A. Abdulhameed, F. M. Alsaadi, and H. A. Alhashmi, “Using Fuzzy Cognitive Maps for Modeling Environmental Aspect of Sustainable Development in Construction Projects,” Journal of Applied Engineering and Technological Science (JAETS), vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 599–616, 2025.
[25] X. Li, W. Feng, X. Liu, and Y. Yang, “A comparative analysis of green building rating systems in China and the United States,” Sustain. Cities Soc., vol. 93, p. 104520, 2023.
[26] E. Tahseen and S. K. Al-Jumaily, “Mechanisms for Reviving the Intangible Cultural Heritage to Revitalize Urban Spaces ”, Int. J. Environ. Eng. Educ., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 31–42, Dec. 2020.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Advance Sustainable Science Engineering and Technology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
