Page 112 - JCAU-6-3

Journal of Chinese
Architecture and Urbanism Sustainability of courtyard building

as siheyuan (四合院), which features houses on four sides materials, land use and ecology, emissions, and innovation
of a central courtyard (Yang, 2021). The accumulation of (Green Building Council Australia, 2022a&b). As of 2022,
design and construction experience over many generations the system was divided into four tools: communities, design
makes Chinese courtyard buildings a wealth of content & as built, interiors, and green star performance. The
worthy of study. performance tool evaluates the operational performance

Chinese courtyard buildings typically have a north- of existing buildings across the abovementioned nine
south orientation, closed structures, clear axes, left-right categories (Green Building Council Australia, n.d.).
symmetry, flexible and scalable structures, and the ability BREEAM adopts the core concept of “localization and
to adapt to various geographical environments, forming balanced benefits,” making it both an “international” and
different sub-types in different regions (Delsante & Zheng, “local” green building rating system. It is a set of criteria for
2018). This means that when applying a case study method, assessing green buildings and a practical approach to green
the case may be unique, local, and exhibit characteristics building design (BREEAM, 2024). BREEAM contains nine
adapted to its specific environment. credits: energy, health and well-being, land use, materials,
Few articles discuss the advantages of courtyard management, pollution, transport, waste, and water
buildings in China. Yang (2015) discuss the outcomes (Altomonte et al., 2017).
of the “stack effect” on heat convection, temperature The NABERS rating system, which uses the same six-
regulation, ventilation, and other factors, suggesting that star rating as Green Star, assesses building energy efficiency,
the interior temperature of a courtyard is nearly 10°C water usage, waste management, and IEQ, indicating a
lower in summer than the directly sunlit outdoor areas. building’s operational sustainability (NABERS, 2022).
However, aspects such as materials and structures are not Its main focus has been on operational building energy
addressed. Ji et al. (2020) qualitatively discuss building consumption.
layout and orientation, the heat storage performance
Boarin et al. (2014) discussed the effectiveness of
of soil, the natural ventilation caused by the pressure applying the LEED rating system to the retrofitting of
difference between the patio and the interior, and the historical buildings, using a case study of a medieval fortress
hollow outer protection, which is conducive to ventilation in Perugia, Italy. They assessed stable heating, cooling, and
and heat dissipation. Unfortunately, there is a lack of data hot water demand using EnergyPlus, a building energy
to enable a quantitative assessment.
simulation software developed by the US Department of
2.2. Green certification systems Energy. Since the building has virtually no residents and
minimal energy needs, the estimated energy consumption
Many certification systems have been developed around corresponds to the retrofitted scenario, making it relevant
the world to support the sustainability assessment of to the present research. However, the version of LEED used
buildings (Wen et al., 2020). Although most standards in the Italian research had been adapted by the authors to
originate in a particular country, some, such as Leadership suit local conditions and the characteristics of historical
in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and Building buildings.
Research Establishment Environmental Assessment
Method (BREEAM), have been applied internationally. Given that the case study is Chinese courtyard houses,
Here, we briefly explore the Green Building Council of building rating systems from China or other Asian
Australia’s Green Star system, the National Australian countries may be more suitable and thus need to be
Built Environment Rating System (NABERS) Energy Base discussed. China’s Assessment Standard for Green Building
Building Rating, the United States (US) LEED, China’s GB/T 50378-2014 includes the following categories: Land
Assessment Standard for Green Building GB/T 50378- saving and outdoor environment, energy saving and energy
2014, and Japan’s Comprehensive Assessment System for utilization, water saving and water resource utilization,
Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE) to ascertain a material saving and material resource utilization, IEQ,
suitable evaluation framework for this research. Existing operations management, and lifecycle performance (NBS,
building certification guidelines were reviewed to support 2014). The categories of Japan’s CASBEE rating system
the investigation of a representative traditional Chinese include nature conservation, local environment quality,
courtyard building. resource recycling, CO sinks, living environment, social
2
services, social, industrial and financial vitality, and
Green STAR is popular in Australia and South Africa
and can be used for a variety of building types, which are emission trading (CASBEE, 2022).
evaluated under nine categories: management, indoor Although each rating system uses different names
environmental quality (IEQ), energy, transport, water, for categories, they can be roughly divided into the

Volume 6 Issue 3 (2024) 4 https://doi.org/10.36922/jcau.3187