6 4

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

INTRODUCTION

Following the publication of the BrundtlandCommission report in 1987 (WCED, 1987), theconcept of sustainable development has evolvedsignificantly from a set of initially loosely relatedenvironmental concerns (Rodwell, 2007) to signifythe practice of protecting the natural environmentthrough the inclusion of social, economic, and cul-tural dimensions of human activities. As a result ofmajor international action plans and agreements,such as Agenda 21 and the Kyoto Protocol, sus-tainable development (SD) has now become a pol-icy priority for governments across the world. Today,issues of climate change adaptation and the pro-motion of SD principles are acknowledged throughthe development of international and national pol-icy decision-making. Most countries across theworld have begun to implement required actions toachieve concrete measures in mitigating climatechange through imposing new requirements andconditions on their industrial and economic activi-ties. The construction and property sector occupiesa central position in the SD process particularlybecause of its material throughput, its scale ofresource and energy use, and its faster rate ofincrease in energy use compared to other sectors(Schropfer, 2012). In response to this, many initia-tives are being implemented at the scale of built

environment, involving, for example, the introduc-tion of new building codes, energy regulations,technical guides, and assessment tools. Many ofthese responses have tended to focus on aspects ofenergy efficiency and performance in buildings.However, more recently the transition from energyperformance to sustainable performance, involvesa shift from technical-based building codes and sin-gle criteria evaluations (e.g. energy performance),to a more holistic performance-based approach -an evaluation of buildings that considers a broaderrange of sustainability factors (Cooper, 1999; Kaatz, et al., 2006). Within the context of this broaderframework of considerations, Building SustainabilityAssessment Methods (BSAMs) can contribute effec-tive and practical tools for the built environment to“provide a structured means of incorporating per-formance targets and criteria into the designprocess” (Crawley and Aho, 1999).

In recent years, the important role ofBSAMs in addressing climate change adaptationmeasures within the design and construction sectorshas led to the development of several buildingassessment schemes around the word. Influencedby the most widely known schemes – BREEAM andLEED – many countries have now adopted one ormore of the existing schemes or have developedtheir own national assessment methods. Althoughthe application of most BSAMs are voluntary, their

Shahrzad Malek, David Grierson

Abstract

As one of the fastest growing countries in the Middle East, and the one most vulnerable to climate change, the main

challenge now facing Iran today is how to house its growing population in a socially, economically, and environmen-

tally sustainable way. However, in the absence of a national framework to guide the sustainable development of the

built environment, responding to this challenge is problematic. The articulation of a comprehensive assessment method

that would enable issues of sustainability to be addressed and incorporated within building construction projects is

urgently required. The research that underpins this paper takes account of current tools in aiming to support the devel-

opment of a national building sustainability assessment method (BSAM) for use in Iran that involves the identification

of sources of impact, specific benchmarks, and priorities for a weighting system for assessment criteria. This paper pro-

files the basis of a contextual framework that will inform the development of such a regional-based tool, taking account

of Iran’s current climate change adaptation policies and priorities, its environmental conditions and socio-economic

challenges, building typologies, standards and benchmarks.

Keywords: Iran, Sustainability, Building Assessment Method, Climate Change Adaptation, Building Codes.

A CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE DEVELOP-MENT OF A BUILDING SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENTMETHOD FOR IRAN.

6 5

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

sonrole in effecting market transformation (Cole,

2005), enforcing building codes and regulations,and serving as design guidelines have now seenthem emerge as an essential tool for supporting asustainable construction process. Indeed, somecountries have now introduced them as mandatorybuilding codes and some others have acceptedthem as an alternative route to complying withbuilding regulations (Crawley and Aho, 1999).Despite an increasing demand stimulated by theintroduction of national and international sustain-ability policies, building codes, and assessmenttools around the world, Iran has yet to introduce acohesive framework to address sustainability issuesin the built environment, particularly within its con-struction sector. Under broader sustainable devel-opment policies, the country requires to developobjective frameworks for different sectors andorganisations in order to tackle climate change andachieve its own SD targets. Considering the impor-tant role of construction, and specifically the hous-ing sector, in Iran’s economic well-being, and as amajor consumer of energy and resources, this sec-tor urgently requires a set of policies and tools,comprehensive building codes, and guidelines andframeworks to promote ecologically-based SD thatare aligned with overall national policies. Thisresearch aims to support this alignment through thedevelopment of a national building sustainabilityassessment method (BSAM) for use in Iran involvingthe identification of sources of impact, specificbenchmarks, and priorities for a weighting systemfor assessment criteria. The paper profiles the basisof a contextual framework that will inform thedevelopment of such a regional tool, takingaccount of Iran’s current climate change adapta-tion policies and priorities, its environmental condi-tions and socio-economic challenges, buildingtypologies, standards, and benchmarks.

CURRENT BU ILD ING SUSTAINABIL ITYASSESSMENT TOOLS

Currently, there are two main ways to address sus-tainability concerns within the built environment:through policy and regulatory instrument andthrough assessment tools (Du Plessisa and Cole,2011). While traditionally, national legislation, pri-marily concerned with the energy performanceissues of buildings, was considered as the main dri-ver to deal with environmental concerns within theconstruction industry (Du Plessisa and Cole, 2011),building assessment tools are increasingly address-ing a broader range of sustainability issues (Cole,1999). Although the first generation of these toolswere striving solely to address environmental per-formance of individual buildings, most recent ver-

sions have started to consider sociocultural andeconomic dimensions and a wider range of appli-cations for different projects based on their scaleand function. Worldwide, there are now more than40 assessment tools/ certification schemes avail-able for evaluating sustainability issues of the builtenvironment. Most of the tools developed in recentyears embrace similarities in terms of theirapproach, methodologies, rating systems, scope ofassessments, and list of criteria. All introduce abroad range of sources of impacts structured underdifferent categories such as energy, site, water,waste, indoor environment quality, and constructionprocess, leading to a specified rating scale whichdetermines the overall sustainability performance ofthe building. In some cases the tools link to othergovernment policies and regulations, while manyadopt criteria and standards that go beyond thepolicy standards set in the countries in which theyare used (Reed, et al., 2009).

The success of assessment tools in creatingpositive change by furthering the promotion ofhigher environmental expectations and serving as apotent mechanism for affecting change in thebuilding sector (Cole, 2005), has resulted in arapid increase in the number of methods beingdeveloped worldwide. However, increased interna-tional interest in developing new market-based (orresearch-based) tools has highlighted problemsassociated with the use of existing generic systemsfor different contexts. The demand for significantorganisational and financial resources, training,technical support (Cole, 2010; Crawley and Aho,1999), and the need to comply with strict brandrules and quality conditions present a substantialchallenge in adapting an existing tool (Cole,2006). Crucially, individual characteristics of eachcountry, such as historical background, climate,geography, culture, type of building stock,resources, building standards, and policies andgovernmental schemes necessitate the develop-ment of an individual sustainability-rating tool forthat country. The use of specific local indicators inthe rating systems and their credit allocation meth-ods renders the term “sustainable construction”subjective (Alyamia and Rezguib, 2012) and con-firms that assessment tools are not fully applicableto all regions (Crawley and Aho, 1999).Furthermore, the ultimate success of an assessmenttool will inevitably rely on its acceptance and on therecognition it receives from the local communityand industry. As suggested by Du Plessisa and Cole(2011), participation and input from stakeholders isessential in achieving the most effective change inshaping design and practice. Stakeholders’engagement can provide a robust and verifiablesupport structure for the implementation, opera-

6 6

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

son

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

tion, and management of an assessment tool (UCD& IGBC, 2011).

The interdependent and holistic nature ofsustainability requires the inclusion of socioculturaland economic issues (as well as environmentalissues) that rely on stakeholder engagement andtheir “stories and aspirations of place” (Du Plessisaand Cole, 2011). This inclusion of stakeholderengagement can help respond to main areas ofcriticism where tools are a) struggling to recognizeregional distinctions, b) lacking to offer a holisticapproach towards sustainability issues, and c) offer-ing insufficient methodological transparency (Kaatz,et al., 2006).

Figure 1 maps recently developed toolsincluding those introduced by government as acountry’s national tool (such as QSAS in Qatar,Estidama in United Arabs Emirates, GBI inMalaysia, Greenship in Indonesia, LOTUS inVietnam), and those developed as a research-based tools (such as GBtool/SBtool developed asan international tool with the collaboration of 21countries through Green Building Challenge(GBC), MOBSA developed by Zalina Shari forMalaysia, SABA developed by Ali & Nsairat forJordan, SEAM developed by Alyami & Rezgui forSaudi Arabia). Research analysis suggests that: a) aset of core criteria relevant to the assessment con-

text can be driven through the comparative andcontextual analysis of existing assessment tools, b)regional specifications can be integrated into theassessment system through stakeholder engage-ment c) where metrics, data sources and referencebenchmarks are not available, consensus basedprocess is the most applicable method to developperformance criteria assessment targets (Todd et Al,2001).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF AMETHODOLOGY: TOWARDS A BSAMFOR IRAN

Developing an assessment method is a multi-aspect procedure, which requires input data frommultiple sources and the employment of variousmethodological approaches. Assessment methodsare composed of three main elements:

• Assessment criteria: identifies the sources ofimpacts that should be taken into account andassessed against performance benchmarks; • Benchmarks: represent the required performancestandard expected to be met by the building indus-try;• Weighting of criteria: prioritises assessment crite-ria based on their international, national and

Figure 1. Map of Current Global Building Sustainability/ Environmental Assessment Rating/ Certification Tools (Source:

Authors).

6 7

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

son

regional importance, and scale and duration ofimpact.

These core elements play a crucial role inthe validation of the assessment method and havea direct impact on the outcome of the assessmentpractice. Our research proposes a framework forthe development process consisting of five interde-pended stages as follows:

Stage 1: Feasibi li ty s tudyThe first step is to conduct a feasibility study in orderto explore the country’s current progress in strikinga balance between its policies and the wider sus-tainable development agenda, and to identify spe-cific conditions, constraints, goals, priorities andchallenges in promoting sustainability strategieswithin its construction industry in general, and bar-riers to developing an assessment method in par-ticular. Outcomes of Stage 1 should be discussedand analysed by panels of experts at later stages ofthe development process, and appropriate mea-sures should be established to overcome existingchallenges and constraints and to clarify regionalpriorities and goals.

Stage 2: Ident i fying sources of impactThe next step is to identify sources of environmen-tal, sociocultural, and economic impacts thatshould be included in the assessment method. It isacknowledged that a set of core criteria have glob-al importance and relevance (i.e. are relevant allassessment methods across the world) and shouldbe included in any new scheme that aims to assessthe sustainability performance of buildings (Coleand Mitchell, 1999; Todd and Geissler, 1999).These criteria can be derived from existing assess-ment methods through a comprehensive compara-tive analysis of their content and approach, focus-ing on their areas of convergence and distinction(Cole, 2005). This analysis serves as a startingpoint in the formulation of an initial tentative list ofassessment criteria as suggested by Cole (1999).The list is then subject to multiple modifications bypanels of experts in order to fully reflect sociocul-

tural, environmental, and economic requirementsat both regional and national scales. Here, thecomposition of the expert panels is important indeveloping a flexible assessment method thatallows for regional customisation and addressesvariations under a single national scheme.Moreover, since assessment criteria are multi-dimensional and require input data from a vastrange of different fields, expert panels shouldinclude stakeholders from all relevant sectorsincluding academia, industry, and government(Alyamia and Rezguib, 2012). The composition ofexpert panels also plays a crucial role in receivingacceptance and recognition from relevant commu-nities.

Stage 3: Ident i fy ing specif ic benchmarksThe third step is to explore current standards andindustry norms, develop performance targets, anddefine desired outcomes of assessment criteria andthe overall performance of the building. These arealso identified through expert panel discussions andconsensus.

Stage 4: Ident i fy ing pr ior i ties and devel-oping the weighting systemThe fourth step is concerned with identifying nation-al and regional priorities and measuring the rela-tive importance of various assessment criteriathrough a questionnaire survey. In order to developa weighting system based on the priority sets deliv-ered by the judgments of experts, a pairwise com-parison methodology involved in the AHP tech-nique (Analytical Hierarchy Process) is acknowl-edged to be the most applicable approach in syn-thesising the data and prioritising building assess-ment criteria for the given context.

Stage 5: Veri f ication, test ing, and modi-f icat ionThe reliability and applicability of any assessmentmethod is subject to testing through experts’ verifi-cation and industry application in case study testing(Cole and Larsson, 1999). In this regard, the newscheme should be sent to experts for verificationand further modifications and finally tested throughthe application and evaluation of case study pro-jects. The results of these studies should inform fur-ther refinement of the new scheme.

A CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR ABSAM: PROFILE OF IRANClimate change and sustainable devel-opment

Due to its geographical location, climate, high riskof natural disasters, oil dependent single-product

Figure 2. Methodology for the development of a BSAM for

Iran (Source: Authors).

6 8

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

son

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

economy, overpopulation, rapid urbanisation,energy inefficiency, and unsustainable developmentpatterns, Iran is classified as one of the most vul-nerable regions to the impacts of climate change(DoE, 2004). Iran is the eighth largest contributor tothe global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions glob-ally (WB, 2015). The energy sector accounts for the77% of the country’s overall GHG emissions(Nachmany, 2015). Almost all (97%) of the Iran’senergy consumption relies on oil and natural gaswhile only 0.03% of electricity generation is fromrenewable sources (Nasrollahi, 2009). Over recentdecades, Iran’s environment has deteriorated andits natural resources have been significantly deplet-ed due to the lack of a coherent vision for sustain-able development, inadequate protective legisla-tion, lack of regulations and enforcement, unsus-tainable patterns of production and consumption,and infrastructural fragmentation (UNDAF, 2004).The result is that today, Iran struggles with manyenvironmental problems in urban areas such as arapid increase in domestic energy and resourceconsumption, an increase in pollution, the degra-dation of scarce water resources, and an increasein the quantity of solid waste. According to Iran’sDepartment of Environment, the average per capi-ta renewable water availability will be reduced by31% by 2021 compared to 2009 (DoE, 2010).The UN Department of Economic & Social Affairshas reported that 90% of Iran’s generated waste isbeing disposed in landfills, causing environmentaldamage and contamination of lands and waterresources (UN, 2004). Iran is already one of themost seismically active countries with fault lines cov-ering almost 90% of the country (Mansouri, el al.,2008). As a result of the increasing impacts of cli-mate change, it is predicted that the country will bemore exposed to environmental risks and severeweather events such as earthquakes, floods, etc.over coming decades (Pahl-Weber, et al., 2013).

In response to concerns on global warm-ing, Iran signed and ratified the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC) Kyoto Protocol in August 2005 and andestablished the Iranian National Committee onSustainable Development (INCSD) under the super-vision of the Department of Environment (DoE) topromote the implementation of SD approachesaligned with the Earth Summit’s Agenda 21 andrelated international conventions (DoE, 2004 and2013). Although Iran has yet to develop an officialnational action plan for SD, a concern for climatechange has been incorporated into the country’s20-year Vision Plan (20-VP), its Fifth DevelopmentPlan (FDP), as well as other sector policies and reg-ulations (Nachmany, 2015). Iran’s current SDstrategies emerge from Article 50 of the country’sconstitution that is dedicated to the environment.According to this Article (The Constitution of theIslamic Republic of Iran, 1979):

“The Protection of the environment, in which currentand future generations have a right to flourish-ing social existence, is regarded as a public duty. Inthis regard, any economic or other activities causingpollution or any irreparable damage to the envi-ronment is forbidden.”

The country's 20-VP defines the direction of Iran’sdevelopment in various fields such as culture, sci-ence, economy, politics, and social (EDC, 2003).While the main development objectives within theplan are targeted at social and economic advance-ments, environmental protection is addressed with-in a number of articles. The most important aspectsrefer to the protection of natural resources, the opti-misation and reduction of energy consumption,and the promotion of public awareness and theachievement of sustainable development throughthe development of research activity. Iran’s FDP isaligned with the principles of 20-VP and aims to ful-fil its goals and objectives, by emphasising the pro-motion of environmental protection and climatechange prevention, while mandating all relevantministries to develop and implement programsleading to the reduction of GHG emissions. TheFDP anticipates that through the adoption of poli-cies established in 20-VP, the country will be able toreduce its GHG emission by 30% by 2025(Nachmany, 2015). The Iranian government hasalso announced a further possible reduction inemissions of 34% by utilising the technical andfinancial assistance of international institutions(Nachmany, 2015).

Given the context of Iran as one of themajor producers and consumers of fossil fuel ener-gy, the government’s climate change adaptation

Figure 3. Oil dependency, climate change and environ-

mental problems in Iran (Source: Iran Daily, February2015).

6 9

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

sonplans mainly focuses on the following areas: devel-

oping renewable energy plans and related techno-logical improvements, developing a SubsidyReform Plan, enforcing electricity duty, changing theculture of consumption and promotion of produc-tivity and efficiency within all sectors and industries,and establishing energy standards. However, thereare few policies and frameworks to directly promotethe sustainability and energy efficiency of the builtenvironment related to the construction sector. Themain legal instrument in this regard is within theIranian National Building Code, where there is astated focus on energy savings at the level of singlebuildings, emphasising U-factors (thermal insula-tion properties) of a building’s envelope and itscomponents, and proper overall insulation(Nasrollahi, 2009). Iran’s legislation on AlteringEnergy Consumption Pattern also calls for a changein the culture of consumption stressing on theimportance of energy efficiency in residential andcommercial buildings through the provision ofpower plants. The FDP also obliges municipalitiesto comply with the building codes and regulationsto retrofit buildings and modify the pattern of ener-gy consumption in buildings with a primary empha-sis on residential buildings. The National Rules ofProcedure for Implementation of the UNFCCC andthe Kyoto Protocol, which were developed by theDepartment of Environment (and approved by thecabinet in 2009), oblige all ministries and organi-sations to develop their own Climate ChangeAction Plans, prepare relevant assessments andbenchmarks, and introduce respective policies, leg-islations, guidelines, and frameworks. The develop-ment of a national building sustainability assess-ment method (BSAM) for use in Iran should help toaddress this obligation.

The Construction industry and housingsector

Housing is one of the most important sectors toIran’s economy attracting about 40% of the coun-try’s total annual investment, and contributing morethan 20% of annual fixed capital formation. Thesector generates over 8% of GDP and constitutes12% of the employment of Iran’s working popula-tion, while at the same time accounting for 33% ofhousehold expenses (World Bank, 2004).Throughout recent decades, the main challengefacing Iran’s government has involved economic-related housing problems and the need to meethousing demand with an emphasis on affordablehousing for lower and middle income families.Iran’s housing stock of 198 units per 1,000 resi-dents is already low by international standards(World Bank, 2004) and it is estimated that at least

4 million new homes are required to meet thedemand for the next five years (Shahriari, et al.,2014). In this context, providing affordable homesand relevant infrastructure has long been an urgentpriority for the government. The provision of highdensity residential complexes within its cities (suchas Mehr Housing Scheme) and the creation of newresidential towns around metropolitan cities (suchas Andisheh, Pardis and Parand near Tehran) havebeen two key responses by the public sector to thisrising demand. However, the lack of an integratedplanning and management system and the veryslow pace of infrastructure deliveries have hinderedprogress. Economic constraints and the lack of effi-cient building codes and legislation have alsoresulted in poor construction quality of those resi-dential units provided. Additionally, as real estatedevelopment is seen as a profitable investment inIran, developers are consistently compromising thequality of design and construction in order toachieve greater profits in a shorter period of time(Sarkheyli, et al., 2012). In many cases, developersare even happy to pay fines for violations of rulesand building codes since these have little financialimpact (Pahl-Weber, et al., 2013) on their profits.Consequently, this has led to the deterioration ofthe urban fabric and has had a significant negativeimpact on the natural environment.

The World Bank has reported that Irandoes not have an integrated building code to sup-port and encourage SD and the use of appropriatetechnology (World Bank, 2004). In order to miti-gate a building’s vulnerability to natural disasters,building regulations in Iran implicitly favour steeland concrete structures, thus promoting modernenergy-intensive materials. Iran’s building sector isresponsible for 42% of total energy consumptionand the fastest growing sector (Riazi and Hosseyni,2011). The residential sector has the highest ener-gy consumption contributing to the 23% share of

Figure 4. Construction work on a high-rise building in the

foothills of the Alborz Mountains in Tehran, April 15, 2010.(Source: REUTERS/Caren Firouz, April 2010).

7 0

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

son

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

total CO2 emission in Iran (World Bank, 2004)with heating and cooling being the main con-sumers with 83% of total energy used (Riazi andHosseyni, 2011). There is also a considerableamount of wasted energy in the residential sectordue to inefficient construction methods andprocesses and energy intensive household appli-ances (Farahmandpour, et al., 2008). Moreover,municipality supervision lacks the capacity to per-form any effective form of quality control. The lackof an integrated building code has led to the prolif-eration of structures in Iran that contain energy-intensive materials, consume enormous amounts ofenergy, release large amounts of carbon dioxide,use the most wasteful construction techniques, havepoor design and air quality, and have little to offerin terms of cultural and social needs of their occu-pants. It is clear that Iran needs to revise urbanplanning regulations, upgrade infrastructure, pro-mote cost-effective, energy-efficient, environment-friendly housing typologies and reduce the use ofhazardous materials, make provisions for increas-ing effective life and durability of building stock,through a revision of standards, and completion ofthe remaining parts of Iranian National BuildingCode (World Bank, 2004). The development of anational building sustainability assessment method(BSAM) for use in Iran should help support thisprocess.

Building typology and cl imate

Recent research work considers the natural and cli-matic characteristics of different regions of Iran andintroduces various classifications each presenting adifferent approach for different purposes.Considering required thermal properties of build-

ings, the country can be divided into 8 large cli-matic zones (Kasmaei, 1992). Kasmaei’s classifica-tion has been approved by Iran’s Ministry ofHousing and Urban Development as the authorita-tive document for the climatic classification forbuilding design purposes (Kasmaei, 1992).However, his classification can also be groupedinto four main climatic zones that not only representgeo-climatic variation but also represent sociocul-tural factors and similarities in lifestyle and buildingtypologies. Such classification is widely acknowl-edged by other researchers in the field of climaticresponsive architecture and is more relevant to ourresearch as it also represents socio-cultural diversi-ties of the regions (Ghobadian, 2015). The tablebelow shows the climatic classification of Iran andassociated traditional building typologies featuringdifferent climatic responsive strategies based onboth sociocultural and environmental necessities ofregional conditions.

Despite having a rich history in climaticresponsive architecture, environmental factors havelargely been ignored in the formation of modernbuildings in Iran, as construction shifted from craft-based to industry-based practices. Subsequently,with the introduction of new materials, buildingtechnologies and equipment, and constructiontechniques, building typologies completely trans-formed in favour of a modern lifestyle. Diversity ofbuildings in different climate regions of Iran has lostits ground and has been replaced by homoge-neous building types in different regions of Iran.Planning controls and building regulations havealso played a very important role not only in limit-ing and regulating construction practices but alsoby encouraging the introduction of new generichousing typologies. New controls have largely dic-

Figure 5. Different traditional building typologies in different regions of Iran. Left, Yazd in central plateau (Source: Ghods

Online News, January 2014). Right, Langrood in North of Iran (Source: Pejman Marzi, March 2015).

7 1

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

son

tated the emergence of typologies that have had asignificant impact on urban built form in terms ofland parcel, block size, proportion of built area, aswell as on built form parameters such as buildingshape and depth mediated by building regulations(Shayesteh and Steadman, 2013). Since the mainbuilding codes apply throughout all regions of Iranthere is sparse acknowledgement of regional cli-matic conditions, which results in the prevalence ofsimilar, often inappropriate building typologieswithin different regions throughout Iran (Nasrollahi,2009). The development of a national building sus-tainability assessment method (BSAM) for use inIran that takes account of regional climatic differ-ences, should help address this issue.

CHALLENGES AND LIMITATIONS

A review of current assessment methodologies inrelation to Iran’s contextual framework has high-lighted a number of challenges and limitations thatrequire consideration in the development of thenew BSAM:

Bui ld ing codes, legislat ion, and policiesAn assessment system cannot be efficiently integrat-ed into the construction process as a stand-alonetool (Kaatz, et al., 2005). For the assessmentmethod to be feasible, practical, and acceptable, itis vital that it is integrated with relevant guidelines,building codes and regulations, regional andnational standards, as well larger national andinternational policies and programs. In order toensure successful application, the assessment sys-tem must take account of regulatory instrumentsestablished by the political-administrative systemwithin the relevant context (Todd and Geissler,1999). On the other hand, assessment methodscan be used to enforce essential modifications inregulatory systems or even inform fundamental pol-icy directives at a regional or national level (Cole,2005). In another words, it can push the buildingindustry towards better performance (Todd andGeissler, 1999). In the case of Iran, this seems tobe substantially problematic since building codesand national policies cannot be incorporated into

Figure 6. Architectural features of traditional houses in different climate zones of Iran (Source: Author based on Ghobadian,

2015; Nasrollahi, 2009).

7 2

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

son

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

the assessment system in their current form. As pre-viously discussed, the country’s current buildingregulations can be heavily criticised in failing toacknowledge sociocultural and climatic diversitywithin different regions. Also sustainability thinkinghas yet to be embedded within all governmentalorganisations, executive bodies, and larger policydecisions. Such development takes time andrequires fundamental financial, technological, andinfrastructural changes, involving the restructuringof the entire sector.

BenchmarksThe development of relevant benchmarks or refer-ence buildings for the identification of assessmentcriteria and informing the overall evaluation of abuilding’s performance are commonly based oncurrent performance levels and existing industrynorms, which means that improvements are evalu-ated relative to the typical practice in the region(Cole,1999 and 2005; Todd and Geissler, 1999).Different regions possess different environmentaland resource capacities (e.g. water and electricitysupplies), which entail different management strate-gies and regulations. Similarly, socioeconomic con-straints in different regions require different strate-gies in terms of urban development, spatial plan-ning, and construction. As identified by Todd &Geissler (1999), “superior performance in onecountry would be considered standard practice inanother. And, a criterion that is very important forassessing the ‘greenness’ of a building in oneregion might be of less importance in anotherregion.” This raises a significant challenge for thedevelopment of a BSAM for Iran. Firstly, due to theinefficiency of the current regulatory system, thedevelopment of criteria benchmarks and refer-ences, based on current practice norms, inevitablychallenges the efficacy of the existing system.Secondly, Iran’s regional diversity necessitates thedevelopment of a national BSAM that allows forcustomisation and integration of regional charac-teristics within the evaluation process. Therefore,benchmarks and references must be developedthrough regional comparisons while at the sametime complying with national goals and objectives.

Scale of assessmentsThe BSAM must target global impacts whileresponding to regional concerns but local strategiescan often have global impact and equally interna-tional policies can effect regional decisions.Therefore, the BSAM must focus on the integrationof core criteria with global significance while incor-porating customised elements with regional impor-tance (Todd and Geissler, 1999). The scale ofassessment can refer to assessment criteria relevant

to varying geographic/ physical levels, from build-ing elements and components to the urban, region-al and national scale (Edum-Fotwe and Price,2008). In most cases, the evaluation of an individ-ual building without consideration of extraneousinfluences such as urban configuration, infrastruc-ture, community facilities, etc. is impossible.Therefore, it is crucial to define the appropriateboundaries for assessment criteria and clarifyexpectations with respect to an individual building’sto contribution to overall sustainability goals.

In frastructureThe reciprocal effects of a building on its surround-ing infrastructure have an inevitably important rolein the performance of the BSAM (Todd andGeissler, 1999) since buildings have enormousconsequences on the design and operation of thecommunity (Cole, 2005). At the same time, accessto infrastructural facilities is essential for the opera-tion of a building. Although Iran has experiencedpositive social and economic development over thelast decade, significant social and economicinequalities across different regions remain evident,particularly in terms of a lack of access to infra-structure and social amenities in rural areas. In thiscontext, Iran needs to upgrade infrastructure inexisting sub-standard settlements (World Bank,2004).

Flex ib il ity in addressing regional d if fer-encesThe problematic nature of homogenisation hasbeen widely acknowledged in the adaptation ofexisting assessment methods, where emphasis hasbeen placed on regional differences betweendeveloped and developing countries (Cole, 2005).However, as discussed by Todd and Geissler(1999), defining the boundaries of a ‘region’ isequally important in developing a feasible andacceptable BSAM. The recent enforcement of astandardised national building code has resulted inthe formation of remarkably homogeneous housingtypology in different regions of Iran. However, Iran’sregional diversities necessitate the introduction of anational BSAM that allows for customisation andintegration of regional characteristics.

Emphasise on socio-cul tura l aspectsAll aspects of sustainability are holistic and interde-pendent; hence, sociocultural, economic, and envi-ronmental aspects should be all addressed withinthe BSAM. However, as discussed, there are signif-icant differences in regional priorities in how toaddress sustainability principals. Environmentalassessment methods have originated in developingcountries where social and economic infrastruc-

7 3

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

sontures are already well developed. However, in

developing countries differing socioeconomic pri-orities dictate that domestic constraints on environ-mental progress are qualitatively different (Gibberd,2002; Cole, 2005). On a path to SD, developingcountries must continue to emphasise the fulfilmentof basic needs, and promotion of socioeconomicaspects, while avoiding negative environmentalimpacts (Gibberd, 2002).

Acceptance and recogni tion f rom indust ryFor an assessment system to be reliable, feasible,and applicable, it is essential to receive acceptanceand recognition from the wider community as wellas industry. Consequently, the development of aBSAM must involve stakeholder participation inorder to clarify and meet the requirements andexpectations of the community (Kaatz, et al., 2006).Assessment criteria must consider socioeconomicconstraints and limitations in order to be acceptedby the industry (Todd and Geissler, 1999). Since, inIran, all resource supplies are managed by thepublic sector, the successful implementation of aBSAM necessitates the support of government andpublic organisations not least with regard to thefinancial and economic implications associatedwith its use. Aside from fundamental changes inwider policies and sector decisions that areinevitable in transitioning to SD, the economicimpact of a BSAM on the transformation of the realestate market must be explicitly acknowledged.While the profit motive continues to dominate deci-sion-making, especially in housing and construc-tion practices, the necessary additional costs asso-ciated with implementing a BSAM to support SDneeds to be carefully considered in the context ofIran’s urgent need to promote the sustainability andenergy efficiency of its built environment, and itspublic duty acknowledged in its constitution to pro-tect the natural environment.

CONCLUSION

Iran is a vast country with abundant naturalresources and renewable energy opportunities.However, the current state of energy and resourceuse, environmental degradation, climate changevulnerability, and urban and housing challengesrequires a robust action to promote ecologically-based SD. The country’s recent moves towardsstrategies that address global environmental con-cerns have been a significant step, however, toimplement broader SD policies address climatechange adaptation measures, Iran needs to devel-op objective frameworks within its different sectorsand organisations. In the field of the constructionindustry, this will require the revision of current

urban planning regulations, building codes andstandards, and the introduction of a sustainability-based framework for the assessment of the builtenvironment. This will require the development of anational building sustainability assessment method(BSAM) for use in Iran involving the identification ofsources of impact, specific benchmarks, and prior-ities for a weighting system for assessment criteria.

This paper has profiled the basis of a con-textual framework that will inform the developmentof such a regional tool, taking account of Iran’scurrent climate change adaptation policies, andpriorities, its environmental conditions and socioe-conomic challenges, building typologies, stan-dards, and benchmarks. The findings of this con-textual study suggests the following considerationsfor the next stages of the development of a BSAMto be reported in future publications, involving aneed:

• for integration with Iran’s national building codes,and regulations, regional and national standardsas well as larger national and international policiesand programs;• to set higher performance benchmarks com-pared to current performance levels;• to offer integration of core criteria with global sig-nificance and customized elements of nationalimportance in Iran;• to acknowledge regional variations within Iran;• to offer a comprehensive list of criteria taking intoaccount all interrelated dimensions of sustainabili-ty;• to promote stakeholder participation;• to offer transparency and compatibility;• to propose a simple, practical and inexpensivemethodology for application;• to promote performance based evaluation ratherthan technical assessment

7 4

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

son

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

REFERENCES

ALYAMIA, A., & REZGUIB, Y. 2012. Sustainable building

assessment tool development approach. Sustainable Cities and

Society, 5, 52-62.

COLE, R. 1999. Building Environmental Assessment Methods:

Clarifying Intentions. Building Research & Information, 27(4-5),

230-246.

COLE, R. 2005. Building Environmental Assessment Aethods:

Redefining Intentions and Roles. Building Research &

Information, 35(5), 455-467.

COLE, R. 2006. Shared Markets: Coexisting Building

Environmental Assessment Methods. Building Research &

Information, 34(4), 357-371.

COLE, R. 2010. Building Environmental Assessment in a

Global Market. International Conference in Sustainable

Building Asia. Seoul: CIB Publication.

COLE, R. J., & MITCHELL, L. 1999. Customizing and Using

GBTool: Two Case-Study Projects. Building Research &

Information, 27(4-5), 257-275.

COLE, R., & LARSSON, N. 1999. GBC '98 and GBTool: back-

ground. Building Research & Information, 27(4-5), 221-229.

CONSTITUTION, I. 1979. Constitution of the Islamic Republic

of Iran. Tehran: National Legislative Bodies / National

Authorities. Retrieved 11 09, 2015, from http://www.ref-

world.org/docid/3ae6b56710.html

COOPER, I. 1999. Which Focus for Building Assessment

Methods –Environmental Performance or Sustainability?

Building Research & Information, 27(4-5), 321-331.

CRAWLEY, D., & AHO, I. 1999. Building environmental assess-

ment methods:applications and development trends. Building

Research & Information, 27(4-5), 300-308.

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT (IRAN). 2004. Iran's

Report on 11th Session of the Commission on Sustainable

Development. Tehran: Iran Department of Environment.

Retrieved from http://www.doe.ir/Portal/File/ ShowFile.aspx

?ID=8abf8040-caf5-4c1e-8700-384ac81c7c76

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT (IRAN). 2010. Iran's

Fourth National Report to the Convention on Biological

Diversity. Department of Environment. Retrieved from

https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/ir/ir-nr-04-en.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT (IRAN). 2013. From Rio to

Rio+20. Tehran: Iran Department of Environment .

DU PLESSISA, C., & COLE, R. J. 2011. Motivating change:

shifting the paradigm. Building Research & Information, 39(5),

436-449.

EDC. 2003. Iran's 20-year vision plan. Tehran: Expediency

Discernment Council of Iran. Retrieved 11 21, 2016, from

http://www.dolat.ir/PDF/20years.pdf

EDUM-FOTWE, F., & PRICE, A. 2008. A social Ontotogy for

Appraising Sustainability of Construction Project and

Developments. International Journal of Project Management,

27, 313-322.

FARAHMANDPOUR, B., NASSERI, I., & HOURI JAFARI , H.

2008. Analysis of Ultimate Energy Consumption by Sector in

Islamic Republic of Iran. 3rd IASME/WSEAS Int. Conf. on

Energy & Environment. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

Retrieved from http://www.wseas.us/e-library/confer-

ences/2008/uk/EE/EE-22.pdf

GHOBADIAN, V. 2015. Shape of Sustainable Houses in Iran:

A Climatic Analysis. European Online Journal of Natural and

Social Sciences, 3(3), 110-120.

GIBBERD, G. 2002. The Sustainable Building Assessment Tool:

Assessing How Buildings Can Support Sustainability in

Developing Countries. Built Environment Professions

Convention. Johannesburg, South Africa: Document

Transformation Technologies.

KAATZ, E., ROOT, D. S., BOWEN, P. A., & HILL, R. C. 2006.

Advancing Key Outcomes of Sustainability Building

Assessment. Building Research & Information, 34(4), 308-320.

KAATZ, E., ROOT, D., & BOWEN, P. 2005. Broadening Project

Participation Through a Modified Building Sustainability

Assessment. Building Research and Information, 33(5), 441-

454.

KASMAEI, M. 1992. Report NO. 151: Climatic Classification of

Iran for Housing and Urban Design. Affiliated to the ministry of

housing and Urban Development, Building and Housing

Research Center, Tehran.

MANSOURI, B., FATEMIAGHDA, M., & SAFARI, H. 2008.

Preliminary Earthquake Reconnaissance Report on the June 22,

2002 Changureh (Avaj), Iran Earthquake. Natural Disaster

Research Center of Iran. International Institute of Earthquake

Engineering and Seismology . Retrieved from http://mceer.buf-

falo.edu/research/Reconnaissance/Iran6-22-02/

NASROLLAHI, F. 2009. Climate and Energy Responsive

Housing in Continental Climates: The Suitability of Passive

Houses for Iran's Dry and Cold Climate. Berlin:

Univerlagtuberlin.

NACHMANY, M. 2015. Climate Change Legislation in Iran: An

Excerpt From The 2015 Global Climate Legislation Study.

7 5

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.41

No.2

, J

une

2016. A

Conte

xtual Fr

am

ework

for

the

Dev

elopm

ent of a B

uild

ing S

ust

ain

abili

ty A

sses

smen

t M

ethod for

Iran.

Shahrz

ad M

ale

k, D

avi

d G

rier

sonLondon: The London School of Economics and Political

Science.

PAHL WEBER, E., SEELIG, S., OHLENBURG, H., &

BERGMANN, N. K. 2013. Urban Challenges and Urban

Design, Approaches for Resource-Efficient and Climate-

Sensitive Urban Design in the MENA Region. (R. SCHAFER, F.

NASROLLAHI, H. OHLENBURG, C. SAALMANN, & F. STELL-

MACHER, Eds.) Young Cities Research Paper Series, 5

REED, R., BILOS, A., WILKINSON, S., & SCHULTE, K. W.

2009. International Comparison of Sustainable Rating Tools.

Journal of sustainable real estate, 1(1).

RIAZI, M., & HOSSEYNI, S. 2011. Overview of Current Energy

Policy and Standards in The Building Sector in Iran. In C. A.

BREBBIArebbia, & E. BERIATOS, Sustainable Development and

Planning V (pp. 189-200). Southampton: WIT Press.

RODWELL, D. 2007. Conservation and Sustainability in

Historic Cities. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.

SARKHEYLI, E., SHARIFI, A., RAFEIAN, M., BEMANIAN, M.,

MURAYAMA, A. 2012. An Investigation of the Reasons for

Non-Compliance with FAR Regulations in Tehran. Cities, 29,

223-233.

SCHROPFER, T. 2012. Ecological Urban Architecture:

Qualitative Approaches to Sustainability. Basel: Walter de

Gruyter.

SHAHRIARI, S., MAHOOZI, S., RABII, R., & AZIMI, M. 2014.

Iran Investment Monthly, 9(98).

SHAYESTEH , H., & STEADMAN , P. 2013. The impacts of reg-

ulations and legislation on residential built forms in Tehran. The

Journal of Space Syntax, 4(1), 92-107.

TODD, J., & GEISSLER, S. 1999. Regional and Cultural Issues

in Environmental Performance Assessment for Buildings.

Building Research & Information, 27(4-5), 247-256.

TODD, J., CRAWLEY, D., GEISSLER, S., & LINDSEY, G. 2001.

Comparative assessment of environmental performance tools

and the role of the Green Building Challenge. Building

Research & Information, 29(5), 324-335.

UCD, & IGBC. 2011. Building Environmental Assessment

Method for Ireland. Dublin: UCD Energy Research Group with

the Irish Green Building Council.

UN. 2004. Freshwater and Sanitation Country Profile, Islamic

Republic of Iran. Past Thematic Profiles - Iran , Division for

Sustainable Development, UN Department of Economic &

Social Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/esa/agen-

da21/natlinfo/countr/iran/pastThematicProfiles.htm

UNDAF. 2004. United Nations Development Assistance

Framework (UNDAF) : Islamic Republic of Iran. United Nations.

WB. 2015. World Development Indicators, CO2 emissions.

World Bank. Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC

WORLD COMMISION ON ENVIRONMENT & DEVELOP-

MENT. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford

University Press

WORLD BANK. 2004. Iran – Strategies for the Housing Sector.

World Bank, International Bank for Reconstruction and

Development.

Author(s):

Shahrzad MalekDepartment of Architecture University of StrathclydeGlasgow G1 1XJ, United Kingdom s.malek@strath.ac.uk

David GriersonDepartment of Architecture University of StrathclydeGlasgow G1 1XJ, United Kingdom d.grierson@strath.ac.uk