Pusat Pengajian Pembinaan

FSPU, Shah Alam, Selangor

RESEARCH PROPOSAL FORM

BCM542 Research Methodology and Methods

Name of student

: Muhammad Nur Afiq Bin Md Fuad

Student ID No

: 2014693818

Telephone No

: 0192023726

Title of Research

: A comparison of occupant comfort and satisfaction between a green building and a

Group: AP246-5C

conventional building in Malaysia

Aspects of
Assessment
1.
Title of research
2.

Research statement /
Problem statement

Comments
A comparison of occupant comfort and satisfaction between a green
building and a conventional building in Malaysia
Green buildings provide better environment for their occupants. But, not all
occupant in the building comfort and satisfed. According to Gou et. al. (2012),
some green buildings enjoyed higher satisfaction and comfort, while some
green buildings attracted lower satisfaction and comfort. Based on Abbazadeh
et. al. (2006) research result, occupants in green buildings were more satisfied
with thermal comfort and air quality in their workspace. However, the average
satisfaction scores in green buildings for lighting and acoustic quality were
comparable to the non-green average.
Comparing complaint profiles of those dissatisfied with lighting and acoustic
quality, a higher percentage of occupants were dissatisfied with light levels
and sound privacy in green buildings. This is support by Warren & Peter
(2007), the green building, which is naturally ventilated, is constructed from
rammed earth and recycled materials. The conventional buildings have
heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems and are of brick
veneer construction.
The only difference between the buildings was that occupants of the green
building were more likely to perceive their work environment as warm, and
occupants who felt warm were more likely to describe their work environment
as poor. All other aspects of comfort, including aesthetics, serenity, lighting,
ventilation, acoustics, and humidity, were not perceived differently by the
occupants of the two types of building.

3.

Aims and objectives

The aim of the research is to identify occupants perceived satisfaction and

comfort occupants between green building and conventional building in
Malaysia. In order to achieve this aim following objective were identified:
1. Identify the elements of comfort and satisfaction of occupants from green
building and conventional buildings.
2. To identify the perceived satisfaction and comfort of occupants from
green building and conventional buildings.

3. To identify which factor most influences the overall element of comfort.

4.

Scope and
Limitation

The scope and limitation of this research will be to the following extent:
Among construction stakeholders, developers are the one that dealing with all
parties in order to integrate the ideas to execute the construction project on
site. Occupant of the building also is important in order to get their satisfaction
and evaluation of the building quality. Therefore, this research will be
conducted with focusing to the constructions organization and occupant of the
building within the following responsible person and areas:

Focus only to occupant of green and conventional building in

Malaysia.

Class A (PKK) or Gred 7 (CIDB) contractors and developers are

already engaged with advanced conventional and green building. This
is can be proven when they are already applied green construction
technology such as latest constructions project and experience in the
conventional constructions project.

The limitation of research survey area is which only focus on Middle

of Malaysia.

About 298 number of green building that is certified by the Green Building
Index (GBI) until now. Present total gross floor area is 140,256,368.36 sqft
areas that are certified by GBI and Kuala Lumpur contribute 107 of green
building. This can be convinced (GBI, 2015) that green building industry in
Malaysia had been implemented until nowadays.
5.

Literature Review

The terms sustainable architecture, green building and ecological design

have emerged, along with a host of similar permutations, in recent practice as
environmentally friendly modes of design, construction and operation geared
towards producing healthy enduring communities (Zachariah et al., 2002).
Chatterjee (2009) stated that green buildings exhibit a high level of
environmental, economic, and engineering performance. These include energy
efficiency and conservation, improved indoor air quality, resource and material
efficiency, and occupant's health and productivity.
It is widely believed that green buildings are more comfortable than
conventional buildings; thereby making them more satisfying and productive
workplaces, there is little empirical evidence to support this belief (Heerwagen
and Zagreus, 2005). But not all occupant satisfiy and comfortable to use green
building. This is supported by Gou et. al. (2012), stated that green buildings
can have a more significant impact on their occupant health and productivity
through improving indoor environment quality. However, post-occupancy
studies invariably pointed out that green buildings were not always more
comfortable and productive than non-green buildings.
Conventional building refers to a building built according to the common
practice of a specific country in a specific period (Sartori, 2006). Conventional

buildings use large amounts of energy, land, water, and raw materials for their
construction and operation. By referring on comfort on conventional building,
occupant only satisfies with lighting and acoustic. This is proven by Newsham
et. al., occupants of green buildings tend to show higher satisfaction with air
quality and thermal comfort compared to conventional buildings, whereas
satisfaction with lighting bears little difference between certified and nongreen buildings. On the contrary, their review recognized a clear trend
towards a decrease in acoustic satisfaction in green buildings.
Both green and conventional building is divided into 4 aspect: air, lighting,
noise and temperature. This is supported by Rick (2009) stated that occupant
comfort is addressed in the survey through questions relating to four basic
parameters (air, lighting, noise and temperature) and an overall comfort
question. It is not limited to indoor environment factors such as thermal
comfort and noise intrusion but includes general questions regarding the
occupants perception of the building (e.g. image, safety, cleaning) and
operational issues such as speed and effectiveness of responses to problems
related to building use (adjustments to temperature and lighting for example).
6.

Research
Methodology /
Research Design
Research
question
Hypothesis
(optional)
Data
collection
method

The researchs aim is to identify occupants perceived satisfaction and comfort

occupants between green building and conventional building in Malaysia by
referring to the current status and implementation constraints. In order to
develop this framework, conventional building element must be investigate at
first and followed by elements of green building in Malaysia and finally
proposing a framework of improvement plan. This can be achieved by
fulfilling the research objectives.
Therefore, the research methodology was derived with intention to fulfill the
research objectives and finally the research aim. Postal transmission of
questionnaire was selected as main information gathering. The questionnaire
establishes the background and credibility of the respondents by enquiring
their status and the period they have occupied the buildings. One question
concerns with the respondents overall comfort during occupying the building.
Besides that, personal interview also will be conducted to supplement some
limitations of that postal questionnaire. A literature search was performed
using the key terms: post-occupancy evaluation, occupant satisfaction,
occupant survey, and indoor environment evaluation. The following databases
were used: Google Scholar, ISI Web of Knowledge, PubMed and Scirus.
Selected proceedings and conference papers were also screened. The available
surveys have been classified and analyzed in terms of type of evaluation,
objectives, investigated topics, number of applications, integration with
physical measurements, questionnaire structure, types of questions and
answers, length of time to complete, languages, and distribution and gathering
strategies. The targeted respondents are to be obtained from the occupant of
green building and conventional building in Malaysia. In this research, the
survey receipts are only occupant of the building that is suitable. In addition,
the research only engages the state in the Middle of Malaysia which is
consisting of Kuala Lumpur, Selangor and Putrajaya.

I. Literature Review
The researcher find Literature review as his secondary resources with
aim to investigate the previous research and body of knowledge
particularly on element of green building and conventional building in
terms of its comfort and satisfaction of occupant.
II. Cross sectional Survey
A set of structured questionnaire will be distributed to targeted
respondent. Then the information will be analyze by compare, and
discuss with respect to the researchs objective in term of chart review.
Therefore, the questionnaire will aim to identify the current comfort of
the building. Then, the information will be used to develop issues for
determination of comfort and satisfaction of the building.
III. Semi structured Interview
Semi structured interview will be carried out to collect valuable data for
this research. This interview may conduct to the targeted group of owner
or manager of the building. This survey will aim to determine the
comfort and satisfaction of the building as found from cross sectional
survey.
7.

Significance /
Applied value of the
research

8.

References

This research is expected to determine and counter the problem between green
and conventional building for better building future development in
construction industry. An upgrade or improvement of vulnerability of
buildings and plan how to overcome the disadvantages of both types of
buildings forming part of the design framework. This finding eventually will
improve the quality of the green building and conventional building among
contractors to be better. It also assists in paradigm shift to migrate from lack of
quality to more advance and controlled in construction industry. Green
building is not a simple development trend; it is an approach to building suited
to the demands of its time, whose relevance and importance will only continue
to increase. The benefits to green building are manifold, and may be
categorized along three fronts: environmental, economic, and social.
Abbazadeh, S., Zagreus, L., Lehrer, D. and Huizenga, C. (2006), Occupant
satisfaction with indoor environmental quality in green buildings,
Proceedings of Health Buildings, Lisbon, Vol. III, pp. 365-370.
http://www.yourbuilding.org/library/Occupant%20satisfac tion%20with
%20indoor%20environmental%20quality%20in%
20green%20
buildings.pdf)
Chatterjee, A.K. (2009). Sustainable construction and green buildings on the
foundation of building ecology. Indian Concrete Journal, 83(5): 27-30.
(http://www.sintef.com/globalassets/upload/energi/transes/
article_lifecyle-energy_enb.pdf)
GBI certified summary as of 15 May 2015. (2015). Retrieved from
http://www.greenbuildingindex.org/organisation-certified-buildingsSummary.html

Heerwagen J, Zagreus L. (2005). The human factors of sustainable building

design: post occupancy evaluation of the Phillip Merril environmental
center, Annapolis, MD.
(/http://www.wbdg.org/human_factors_cbf.pdfS)
I. Sartori, A.G. Hestnes (2006) Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and
low-energy buildings: A review article Journal of Building and
Environment: Elsevier 2006, pp. 249-257. (http://www.sintef.com
/globalassets/upload/energi/transes/ article_life-cyle-energy_enb.pdf.)
Newsham G, Birt B, Arsenault C, Thompson L, Veitch J, Mancini S et al.
(2012). Do Green Buildings Outperform Conventional Buildings? Indoor
Environment and Energy Performance in North American Offices.
National Research Council Canada;RR-329:1-71. (http://nparc.cistiicist.nrccnrc.gc.ca/npsi/ctrl?action=rtdoc&an= 20857897)
Rick Best and Brian Purdey (2009) Assessing Occupant Comfort in an Iconic
Sustainable Education Building. Australasian Journal of Construction
Economics and Building. Bond University, Australia, pp. 55-65
(http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/AJCEB/article/ download /
2537/2934.)
Warren L. Paul, Peter A. Taylor (2007) A comparison of occupant comfort and
satisfaction between a green building and a conventional building.
Journal of Building and Environment: Elsevier 2007, pp. 1858-1870.
(http://naulibrary.org/dglibrary/admin/book_directory/
Environmental_management/6458.pdf)
Zachariah, J.L., C. Kennedy, and K. Pressnail. (2002). What makes a building
green? International Journal of Environmental Technology and
Management,
2(1-3):
38-53.
(http://www.researchgate.net/
profile/Mohamed_Samer2/publication/245543328_Towards_the_
implementation_of_the_Green_Building_concept_in_agricultural_
buildings/links/00b4951d8441cb914d.pdf)
Zhonghua Gou, Stephen Siu-Yu Lau, and Zhidong Zhang (2012) A
Comparison of Indoor Environmental Satisfaction between Two Green
Buildings and A Conventional Building In China. Journal of Green
Building: Spring 2012, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 89-104.(http://www.journal
ofgreenbuilding.com/doi/abs/10.3992/ jgb.7.2.89)

Name of Assessor :

Signature

..

Date