The construction sector is responsible for the 40% of consumed resources, 40% of CO₂ emissions, and approximately 40% of construction and demolition waste. For the assessment of the building, there exists a standardized method, life cycle assessment (LCA), however, the process requires time, cost, and most importantly expertise. In this paper, a method is proposed and analyzed for the life cycle assessment of the building for the embodied carbon in the three stages, construction, operation, and demolition. Moreover, the result of the analysis is considered as the base result, and de-carbonization strategies identified through literature study for the three stages of construction, operation, and demolition are assessed with the same method to know how much each strategy will be effective in minimizing the embodied carbon. For the base case, a high-rise residential building in an urban region of India is analyzed, based on existing conditions through the building information modeling (BIM) method. The carbon emission of the selected building comes out to be 414 kg CO₂e/m²/year, and assessing different decarbonization strategies, considering the first analysis as the baseline, it can be minimized to 135 kg CO₂e/m²/year.

Globally, a primary concern is whether green office buildings perform as promised in terms of providing better indoor environment quality (IEQ) for employees, which may affect their satisfaction and work performance. In the Middle East, although there has been renewed interest in green building design, post occupancy evaluation of performance has never been conducted to-date, and evidence of actual occupant perception in green and non-green buildings is still ambiguous. Hence, we present the first study on IEQ performance in the Middle East. We show that Jordan can be taken as a representative example and systematically compare five “green” office buildings (representing 71% of all green-certified office buildings) against eight comparable conventional office buildings (CBs). Detailed bi-lingual survey data on perceived IEQ (n = 502) and work performance are accompanied by high-resolution continuous physical measurements of air temperature + relative humidity (n = 83) and CO₂ concentrations (n = 21) with periodic measurements of mean radiant temperature and air speed, covering two typical summers and one typical winter. Results show both buildings types comply with design standards for indoor CO₂ levels, while thermal comfort in green buildings is better than in CBs. However, CBs have a higher overall occupant satisfaction of IEQ. Work performance measured as absolute and relative absenteeism was slightly higher in CBs, with no significant differences in relative and absolute presenteeism between the two buildings types. These findings challenge the notion that green buildings improve occupant satisfaction and work performance over CBs and suggest the need for a better understanding of the performance-satisfaction gap.

Existing research has primarily focused on investigating barriers in developed countries, emphasising economic, technical, and governmental factors which impede the diffusion of green building practices. However, developing regions, including the Middle East, often must be represented in green building research. Understanding these region-specific barriers is important for developing tailored solutions. In addition, existing identified green building barriers have primarily been obtained from the industry sector, while perspectives from other stakeholders, such as academia, have less attention. Hence, this study compares the perspectives of academic and industry professionals regarding the possible barriers which may impede the adoption of green buildings, with a particular focus on cultural, educational, and social factors. A mixed-method approach was employed, including a large-scale survey (n = 1112) with 54% of the participants being from the industrial sector and 46% being from the academic sector, as well as 17 semi-structured interviews to triangulate the data obtained from the survey. The study was conducted in Saudi Arabia as a representative case of the Middle East. Participants reported 23 barriers, which were themed into six groups: economic, technical, governmental, market demand, educational, and cultural barriers. Notably, seven of these barriers were reported for the first time in this study, including a lack of integrating green building concepts into university curricula, cultural preferences for traditional construction practices, resistance to change, prioritisation of economic factors over environmental and social considerations, a limited number of completed green building projects, delays in the permit and approval processes, and a lack of leadership and coordination. The statistical analysis revealed significant differences between the industry and academic perspectives (p < 0.05, d = 0.61) regarding the barriers to adopting green buildings, with academics over-reporting the educational, cultural, and technical barriers compared with the industry sector. Based on the identified barriers, five strategies were suggested which could help promote the widespread adoption and long-term sustainability of green buildings in the Middle East.