Green Buildings: A study of adoption challenges in the public sector of Pakistan

Green Buildings:A study of adoption challenges in the public sector of Pakistan

Ali AghaJuly, 2014

Research Paper Agha Khan

Abstract

This paper examines the challenges faced by construction industry stakeholders in

Pakistan towards adopting green building specifically focusing on the government or

public sector. Pakistan Government’s lack of vision regarding green construction is

perplexing and in dire need of research and policy insights. Challenges specifically in

the infancy stage of Pakistan ‘Going Green’ are brought to light through a series of

focused interviews of various stakeholders (involved in public sector projects) to

ascertain the main reasons behind the ‘implementation gap’ in green buildings and

thereby creating a climate for better adoption.

It is argued that with deeper understanding gained through stakeholder opinion

research, initiating and navigating green thinking in the public sector can be made

more pragmatic and seamless. This research can be applied to the wider context of

developing world to facilitate governments struggling with green adoption as part of

their national energy and housing policy. In the long run it can act as a catalyst for

change taking us a step closer to a greener world.

2

Green Buildings: A Study of the Adoption Challenges in the Public Sector of Pakistan Ali Agha


1. Introduction

a. Origins of the Green Imperative

Green buildings are becoming the torchbearers of sustainable

development and gaining mainstream acceptance as an answer to

growing global energy demands accentuated in large part by human

induced climate change (Yoon and Lee, 2003). Rapid industrial

development led by China and India has caused widespread

ecological tension between populations and their habitat

especially in dense urban settlements. Deeply embedded in our

collective unconscious is the intuitive awareness of our

relationship to the environment. In his book The Voice of the Earth,3



Theodore Roszak (2001) writes: ‘If psychosis is the attempt to a

live a lie, then the epidemic psychosis of our time is the lie of

believing that we have no ethical obligation to our planetary

home.’

Why do we need green habitats? Victor Papanek (1995) in his

seminal work The Green Imperative, holds technological advances in

construction as tantamount to going backwards in terms of

progress. The primitive man needed food, shelter and clothing.

The modern man is starved of clean air, water, and a noise and

pollution free environment (Papanek, 1995). Technology no doubt

is the answer to modern quality of life and human achievement but

it is perplexing when we seek a technological fix for every

‘ecological dysfunction’ we encounter (Wine, 2004).

Humanity judges its technological progress on the mastery and

control of its surroundings. Some may view this position to be

one sided. One aim of habitat development is also to harmonize

with the environment and not in some cases an assertion of

independence through technology based cocooning. To blend living

and natural habitats is to advance in real terms. No doubt green

technologies have their role but it is within this ‘environment

sympathetic’ thinking that the natural concept of green building

has emerged (Papanek, 1995).

4



b. Definition of Green Buildings

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 2014) states:

“Green building is the practice of creating structures and using processes that

are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building's

life-cycle from sitting to design, construction, operation, maintenance,

renovation and deconstruction.”

EPA (2014) further expands this definition to include the

classical building design concerns of economy, comfort and

durability. The concept of ‘sustainable or high performance

buildings’ is by extension related to green buildings (EPA,

2014).

United States Green Building Council runs a certification program

called Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) which

defines green buildings as an ecosystem comprising five

components (see figure 1). Together these components present a

step by step approach towards creating a green building from

conception to commission.

5



Figure 1 Green Building Components Approach [Source: LEED India 2014]

c. Benefits of Green Buildings

Although studies on green building performance over longer

assessment period with global focus are rather scant, Betzwood

(2011) has been able to produce a comparison of green versus non

green building dynamics at least for the US market (see figure

2):

Figure 2 Do Green Houses Cost More to Build Than Regular Houses?

Source: Betzwood (2011)

6


http://www.betzwood.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Green-Savings.jpg


In the US alone buildings consume 70% of all electricity with a

high percentage of carbon emissions. By going green half as much

energy and water is used, almost 70% less solid waste and carbon

foot-print to reduced to 35%. Figures for payback period range

from 24 months to 7 years and cost premium also varies from 20%

less to 1-2% extra in comparison to conventional buildings.

Howe’s (2010) definition of green buildings incorporates long

term energy use and environment impact through the so called Life

Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach. Of course the calculations above

need to be re-evaluated if the aim is zero carbon.

d. Green Trends

Globally, practitioners are overwhelmingly embracing the green

movement with 94% of architects, engineers and contractors

reporting some form of engagement with green buildings (McGraw-

Hill Construction, 2013). 28% of these practitioners report

heightened green activities which have nearly doubled since the

last 5 years. This represents a watershed moment of renewed

interest in green buildings. By 2015, the heightened green

activity in firms will increase by 82% (McGraw-Hill Construction,

2013). It remains to be seen how accurately predictions for

energy use are met in practice in Pakistan given data from UK

experience (Carbon Buzz, 2014).

7



Interestingly enough, this trend of increased green building

activity is not localized to particular part of the world or to a

certain type of economy suggesting that ‘green’ is not limited by

location, economic conditions or culture (McGraw-Hill

Construction, 2013).

Global trends research on green building such as McGraw Hill

(2013) have assessed project load by type to reveal UAE and

Germany leading the world both in current and expected green work

as shown in figure 4.

Figure 3 Percentage of Green Project Current and Expected by Country

[Source: McGraw-Hill Construction (2013)]

Beyond accessing levels of green activity globally, the next step

is to uncover the triggers that actually bring about adoption.

Lately there has been a shift of emphasis in green building

triggers from (what was considered) ‘the right thing to do’ and a

part of ‘market transformation’ to clients actually ‘demanding8



green work’ and using it as a public relations tool (see figure

4).

Figure 4 Top Triggers in Green Building Growth Globally

[Source: McGraw-Hill Construction, 2013]

But to apply this paradigm to Pakistan, going forward we need to

see the top triggers arrange themselves by country. Here there is

contrast between developed green markets and developing ones in

addition to some cultural effects as well. Analysis of countries

closer to Pakistan such as the UAE and Singapore show that

‘regulation led’ green development will act as the most effective

trigger followed by client and market demand (see fig. 5).

9



Figure 5 Top Three Triggers Driving Future Green Building Activity

[Source: McGraw-Hill Construction, 2013]

Despite all the hype, the number of ‘completely’ green buildings

is relatively very small and not growing at a significant rate.

Only 2% of all new buildings receive LEED certification (Burket,

2011). Most building owners find it hard to maintain the

‘sustainability’ of their sustainable buildings (Burket, 2011).

In addition, the ever complicated technology of Building

Automation Systems (BAS), lack of trained building managers, and

enormous cost of outside experts for fine tuning building

performance have been identified as significant barriers to green

building adoption (Burket, 2011).

e. Adoption in the Research Context?

The ‘level’ of adoption in green building is understood in the

light of E.M Roger’s (1995) ‘diffusion of adoption’ curve (see

figure 6). Roger (1995) however notes that the critical mass to

achieve widespread adoption is to ensure that the technology

crosses the first two portions of the curve below.

10



Figure 6 Diffusion of Adoption Curve Applicable to Green Building Technologies

[Source: Roger (1995)]

f. Green Buildings in Pakistan

In Pakistan energy consumption when analyzed over a ten year

horizon reveals a relatively static picture with a slight bump in

government, domestic and commercial consumption while industrial

energy use has shrunk (see figure 8).

11



Figure 7 Pakistan Energy Consumption by Sector

[Source: Pakistan Energy Yearbook 2012© Hydrocarbon Development Institute ofPakistan]

Both in the residential as well as industrial sector, despite low

per capita energy consumption, Pakistan has a relatively high level

of energy wastage (ENERCON, 2011). Due to inefficient end-use

Pakistan performs poorly compared to developed countries.

ENERCON (2011) energy audits estimate wastage of annual 25-30% in

various sectors of the economy such as agriculture, buildings,

industry and transport. PEY’s (2012) profile of energy consumption

by end user shows households taking a major share at 45.6% (see

figure 9). This is alarming given that the energy consumed for the

same domestic sector in China and UK is 30 % and 40 % respectively

(Sohail and Qureshi, 2011). 12



Figure 8 Percentage Power Consumption by End User Pakistan (2008)

[Source: Pakistan Energy Yearbook 2012© Hydrocarbon Development Institute ofPakistan]

Due to Pakistan’s geographical positioning 70% of the country

experiences a sunny and hot climate throughout the year. Thus any

meaningful green design in Pakistan needs to incorporate concerns

for main energy use towards cooling the internal building envelope.

Although buildings consume 55% of the national energy resources

widespread prevalence of comfortable living spaces still eludes

Pakistan (Sohail and Qureshi, 2011).

ENERCON in collaboration with the Pakistan Engineering Council

launched the new Energy Provisions in 2011 incorporating them in

the Building Code of Pakistan. Once implemented the Energy Code

promises savings of 25-30%. It may be worthwhile to note that even

though there is now a fully developed Energy Code, its enactment

into law is suspect and chances of subsequent implementation rather

bleak due to a lack of political will (ENERCON, 2011).

13



2. Literature Review

a. Green Adoption Studies in Government Sector

Rashid’s (2011) examines Malaysian Public Works Department (PWD)

experience achieving a green nation by the year 2020. PWD made

this possible through a collective approach with all agencies

including environment, housing, water ministries as well as

association of both architects and consulting engineers working

in tandem. In addition demonstration projects paved the way for

full scale green adoption to flourish in the government sector

(Rashid et al., 2011).

In a comparative case study of optimum green assessment tools,

Ali and Nsairat (2008) demonstrate that given the desert

environment Jordanians assign higher weight to water efficiency

and energy efficiency (see figure 11) lending credence to

defining green practices within the local context.

Figure 9 Priority Weighting of Green Assessment Items in Jordon [Source: Aliand Nsairat, 2008]

Ali and Nsairat (2008) not only created a local context green

framework known as SABA, but in order to ensure seamless

14



implementation, a multi-stakeholder participative and

collaborative approach was developed.

b. Stakeholder Influence on Green Adoption

Berardi (2013) in a case study research based in Italy discovers

that barriers emerge as stakeholders who have the power to select

green technologies often have no interest in their adoption. High

uncertainty, lack of communication between stakeholders, and poor

efforts by municipalities to create awareness about energy saving

technologies are increasing the reluctance to adoption at the

micro level.

Choi’s (2009) examines funding issues that arise as feasibilities

are developed using conventional buildings and hence lack

sensitivity to green accounting and life cycle costing and

associated project risks.

c. Flagship Adoption Measurement Studies

Using a two part adoption measuring methodology that combines the

Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)

Malkani and Starik (2013) working on Washington D.C. buildings

perform an examination of the factors that lead to the adoption

15



of green building technologies. The UTAUT adapted from Venkatesh

et al. (2003) posits that four motivational factors collectively

provide an assessment of an individual’s attitude toward adopting

technology (see figure 11).

Figure 10 The Green Building Technology Adoption Model (GBTM)

[Source: Makani and Starik (2013)]

Interestingly non-economic factors of social influence and

facilitating conditions appear to be more important than economic

factors of performance expectancy and effort expectancy as they

tend to act as independent determinants of intentions to adopt

green buildings (Malkani, 2013).

3. Research Design

Green building industry in Pakistan industry is in its infancy

with only a handful of mainly private sector projects completed

16



to showcase green buildings (Rana, 2014). The paper uses existing

literature review of green buildings in general, green technology

use in particular, and adoption studies in the government sector

to find challenges toward green adoption in Pakistan.

The instrument for data collection was the face to face

interview. Questions were largely influenced from literature

review section in particular Malkani (2013), Berardi (2009) and

Choi (2009) as well as set of common adoption studies questions

concerning time frame, budgetary concerns and government related

impediments. The resultant ten part questionnaire was

administered to stakeholders derived from Berardi (2013) (see

figure 12).

17



Figure 11 The Stakeholders for Green Building in Public Sector of Pakistan

[Source: Author from various texts]

Two or more individuals from each of the above stakeholder

categories were interviewed with a total of 14 interviewees for

all questions. Some organizations such as the Urban Development

Unit in the Think Tank categories decided to form a small

research group and responded to interview questions through

uniform consensus. The questionnaire is reproduced below in

figure 13:

18



Figure 12 Questionnaire for Green Building Adoption in Pakistan [Source:Author form review of works]

Stakeholders, though varied in composition, were all involved

with government funded projects. The interview questions were

tested with in-house office employees to minimize language and

interviewer bias (Bolderston, 2012). The author acted as an

independent investigator collecting data with academic

objectivity.19



It is expected that this interview method of investigating

stakeholder’s opinion will help identify the ‘implementation gap’

between perceived and actual green adoption and the ability of

the construction industry in Pakistan to realistically assimilate

innovative thought change (Franz, 1994).

4. Discussion of Interview Responses

a. On Defining Green

The question was added to ensure interviewees clearly understood

green buildings before proceeding with the interview. Of special

note was the response of one Architecture professor who remarked

that ‘green buildings work on the principles of bio-mimicry and

have to be integrated in the natural cycle of ecological

behavior’. A unique definition was advanced by Urban Development

Unit (think tank) official who stated that:

‘Green Building is a structure which has reversible ecological footprint on the

environment and is built with a design approach of sustainable use of natural

resources.

This can with some reservation be interpreted as pointing towards

a system which gives back to the environment what it takes to

function be it energy use or material recycling.

20



b. On Green Policy Focus

All interviewees showed complete consensus on the need for

government to play a pivotal role in developing green momentum.

In particular the think tanks blamed municipalities for a total

lack of vision in green focus. Green Council members and

university professors pointed to government’s obsession with the

supply side of the energy crisis having altogether ignored the

consumption side. Green buildings are a real asset given their

ability to conserve energy, they argued.

Vendors of green technologies insisted on a greater role for

consultants to advise government organization to incorporate

green components early in the design stage so that a more

holistic green design is achieved.

Consultants pressed for implementing the existing Building Code

of Pakistan with Energy Provisions 2011 as a starting point for

green policy. Contractors on the contrary feared aggressive

government focus on greening as it may affect their existing cost

structure and profitability given inaccuracies in green costing.

c. Green Priorities

Stakeholders interest in green components was assessed using

Haselbach’s (2010) LEED based green components as a suggested but

not an exclusive list to choose from. This exercise was intended

21



to give a priority list of green components specific to the

Pakistan market. Response summaries of each stakeholder group are

produced below:

Figure 13 Green Priorities in the opinion of Stakeholders [Source: Interviews]

Stakeholder did not share a collective vision in terms of green

priorities with Consultants pushing for greater fee for

sophisticated services, contractors wanted to sell more building

services, client organization welcomed lower operating costs

professor wanted more client training. It seemed every

stakeholder pursued there own agenda in green priorities.

22



Green Building council members felt that ‘prioritizing’ green

components made no sense in abstraction it is a site specific

process. Inclination in priorities towards education in academics

and towards equipment in vendors was expected.

d. Budget Allocation

A pressing challenge to adoption is the lack of budget allocation

towards green components. This applies to both existing and new

projects. Architects want to spend on fabric, services engineers

focused on efficient services and controls, vendors of green

technologies wanted to sell more of them arguing that it pays

back in the long term (see figure 15).

23



Figure 14 Green budget allocation [Source: Interviews]

Responses that stand out in green priorities include the

disparity between conventional contractors versus design build

who welcomed bigger funding allocation to accommodate design

costs and overheads. Green Council members calculated that any

allocation eventually pays for itself in all greening exercises

over the building lifecycle.

e. Financial, Technical and Political Challenges

There seems to be uniformity of views on the financial side where

most respondents considered high initial cost of green equipment

as a financial deterrent. Green Council members and academics

24



concluded that due to a perceived investment risk banks do not

offer green funding facilities.

Consultants were also of the view that real technical and

financial problem lies in the planning stage of government

projects. When the project is floated for bidding the funding has

already been committed. Consultants suggest getting funds

allocated in the PC-1 (stage). PC-1 is a preliminary design and

costing document developed by the Planning Commission of

Pakistan.

Green council members proposed creating a government program

similar to UK’s Green Deal (but more tuned to Pakistan) to

facilitate greening from a political and financial angle. Think-

tanks like the Urban Development Unit suggest enacting regulation

to compel clients to choose green options and creating the

necessary political pressure which will subsequently evolve into

a comprehensive green policy.

Professors suggest creating a Pakistan version of LEED

certification to address challenges indigenous to the local

climate. Vendors seem worried about interoperability of passive

and active building systems where effective energy use becomes

hard to quantify.

Given government priorities fixed on the energy crisis most

interviewees agreed that gaining political traction for green

25



project is quite a formidable task. The consensus on the

political front seemed to converge in positioning green as a

measure of energy conservation and cost saving to attract mass

popularity.

f. Training Gaps and Client-User Adoption Challenges

Most interviewees proposed setting up a nationwide awareness

campaign with a series of workshops to train industry

professionals on green building practices and certification

standards. Professors suggested the role of academia as pivotal

for research leadership stressed the need for a complete revision

of architecture and engineering curriculum to reflect new green

thinking in order to educate a new generation of green

practitioners.

Consultants acknowledged major deficiencies in green skills and

suggested incorporating green materials in the ‘Composite

Schedule of Rates’ a government document used for specifying and

costing projects at the provincial and federal level. This will

enhance adoption as green items gain official government

approval.

Vendors blamed a lack of availability of green products in the

market as a hindrance to user adoption. Creation of detailed

building manuals highlighting green use will enhance user-client

26



adoption according to manufacturers. Vendor proposed setting up

training institutes from collective green fund.

Green Council members came up with green rebate schemes,

technical assistance from global donors (green grants) and

certification workshops. Also suggested were energy performance

contracting legislation and tax incentives to stimulate the

industry. To enhance user adoption a media campaign was advised

to educate users on energy performance and green transformation

costs. Contractors admitted that green training was an emerging

trend and lower operational costs of green buildings would

enhance both client and user adoption.

g. Time to Critical Mass and Significant Milestones

Stakeholders were asked to estimate a suitable timeline for

Pakistan to ‘go green’. This meant that at least 30 percent of

the projects are conceptualized as green right from the design

stage with substantial (20%) green conversion on existing

buildings. Interviewees were encouraged to devise milestones in

the short, medium and long term. Responses to ‘time to critical

mass’ are summarized below:

27



Figure 15 Time to Critical Mass with Milestones [Source: Interviews]

Academics were rather optimistic assigning a 3-5 years window

while client organizations speculated longer timeframes. This is

because government clients are not the immediate beneficiary of a

green building and may never be actual users (e.g the Health

department can be a client for a hospital to be used eventually

by doctors who may have different priorities) . Contractors

placed time to critical mass at the 10 year mark. Green Council’s

28



development of the Building Guide and Consultants resolve on

designing reference projects in the near to medium term may lead

to the necessary momentum for adoption.

5. Conclusion

Green buildings were examined in terms of their evolving

definition. Global green trends, types of energy use, user

adoption, practitioner adoption, green savings, leading green

countries and the current green successes in Pakistan were

evaluated. It was discovered that Pakistan is at a very

preliminary stage in the modern green cycle. It was argued that

government sector greening is of high strategic value given its

regulatory function and funding capacity.

Research interviews were designed to investigate green buildings

at an ‘early stage’ of adoption. Defining green revealed

innovative definitions as academics called it a form of bio-

mimicry and think-tanks: a reversible ecological footprint. In

green policy focus suggestions the Green Council’s idea of

shifting government focus from energy ‘generation’ to energy

‘conservation’ seemed to them a very pragmatic policy direction

contrary to the UK experience which proposes de-carbonising the

gird instead of lowering energy use (as per consultant’s views).

On green priorities it was realized that the question only made

sense as per site specification and was meaningless in isolation.29



Each stakeholder tried to press green priorities that mattered to

them. Financial, technical and political challenges proved highly

intertwined. Green funding inclusion at the project planning

stage, return on green investments, lack of technical awareness

and a weak political will were determined as major challenges to

adoption.

Stakeholders suggested setting up training institutes and

inclusion of green items in the government rates documents. It

was agreed that green incentives by the government and widespread

creation of green building manuals will lead to higher end user

and client adoption. While time to critical mass ranged from 3-5

years to over ten years by various stakeholders what was more

confidence inducing was the logical planning by consultants

promoting ‘advocacy-prototype-ecosystem-regulatory framework’

(fig. 16) evolution path that can be used as road map for

government policy makers to ensure nationwide adoption in a

comprehensive manner. It is hoped that consultant adoption

roadmap helps Pakistan reach the critical mass of crossing first

two stages of Rogers (1995) ‘Diffusion of Adoption’ curve.

Interview findings also reveals stark implementation gaps such as

government’s inertia on building code implementation, lack of

funding allocation in the planning stage (PC-1) and Green

Council’s inability to create a green building guide to

facilitate industry adoption.

30



While differences in stakeholder opinion is important for this

adoption challenges study and essential to policy formulation,

the level of ‘consensus’ in their opinion was even more

encouraging and a clear indication that Pakistan will indeed have

a very green future not too far away.

6. References

Ali, H. H., & Al Nsairat, S. F. (2009). Developing a green

building assessment tool for developing countries–Case of

Jordan. Building and Environment, 44:5, 1053-1064.31



Betzwood Associates PC (2011) Do Green Homes Cost More to Build than

Regular Houses. Company Website 2014. Accessed June 2014.

Bolderston, A. (2012). Conducting a research interview. Journal

of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, 43(1), 66-76.

Burket, D. (2011). The green building adoption rate is slow,

find out the reason why. Green Economy Post:

http://greeneconomypost.com/practical-side-sustainable-

building-12115.htm accessed, June 2014.

Carbon Buzz (2014). Carbon Buzz Website: Case Studies on

Performance Gaps, http://www.carbonbuzz.org/casestudiestab.jsp

, accessed July 2014.

Choi, C. (2009). Removing Market Barriers to Green

Development: Principles and Action Projects to Promote

Widespread Adoption of Green Development Practices. Josre.

Vol.1. No. 1-2009.

ENERCON (2011). Conduct of Workshop on Implementation of

Building Code of Pakistan- Energy Provisions 2011,Terms of

Reference (TOR), National Energy Conservation Center (ENERCON)

Government of Pakistan.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), (2014). [online]

Available at: http://www.epa.gov/greenbuilding/pubs/about.htm

[Accessed 12 May. 2014].

Franz, Jill M. (1994) A Critical Framework for Methodological Research in

Architecture. Design Studies 15(4):pp. 433-47.

32



Haselbach, L. (2010). The Engineering Guide to LEED-New Construction,

(Green Source): Sustainable Construction for Engineers. McGraw Hill

Professional.

Howe, J. C., Gerrard, M. and Fucci, F. R. (2010). The Law of

Green Buildings. Chicago, Ill.: American Bar Association, Section

of Environment, Energy, and Resources.

Malkani, A., & Starik, M. (2013) The Green Building Technology

Model: An Approach to Understanding the Adoption of Green

Office Buildings. Josre Vol. 5, No. 1- 2013.

McGraw-Hill (2013) Construction World Green Building Trends Smart Market

Report Categories of Green Building Products that are Expected to See Growth in

Next Five Years.

Papanek, V. (1995). The Green Imperative: Ecology and Ethics in Design and

Architecture (pp. 113-138). London, UK: Thames and Hudson.

PEY (2012) Pakistan Energy Yearbook 2012© Hydrocarbon

Development Institute of Pakistan.

Rana, Aqrab Ali. (2014). Personal interview with Aqrab Ali Rana CEO and

LEED AP Pakistan Green Building Council. Lahore June 2014.

Rashid, Y., Sulaiman, M., Aziz, A., Selamat, H., Mat Yani, A.

and Kandar, M. (2011). Greening government’s office buildings:

PWD Malaysia experiences. Procedia Engineering 21 (2011) 1056 – 1060.

Rogers, E.M., (1995) Diffusion of Innovation, 4th Edition (New York:

The Free Press)

Roszak, T. (2001). The voice of the earth: An exploration of eco-psychology.

Red Wheel/Weiser.

33



Sohail, A. and Qureshi M. (2011) Energy Efficient Buildings in Pakistan.

College of Electrical & Mechanical Engg., COMSATS Science

Vision Vol.16 and Vol. 17.

Berardi, Umberto, D. (2013). Stakeholders’ influence on the adoption of

energy-saving technologies in Italian homes. [online] Academia.edu.

[Accessed 31 Jul. 2014].

Venkatesh, V., M. Morris, G. Davis, and F. Davis. (2003) User

Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View.

MIS Quarterly, 27:3, 425–78.

Wiley, J., J. Benefield, and K. Johnson. (2010) Green Design

and the Market for Commercial Office Space. Journal of Real Estate

Finance and Economics, 2010, 41:2, 228–43.

Wine, James., (1994) Lecture at the Canadian Design

Conference. Vancouver. February 1994.

Yoon, S. W., & Lee, D. K. (2003). The development of the

evaluation model of climate changes and air pollution for

sustainability of cities in Korea. Landscape and urban

planning, 63:3, 145-160.

34


Green Buildings: A study of adoption challenges in the public sector of Pakistan

Documents