Thesis - 2013 - MSC - Redl

Sustainable Building Certification
The Case of Hotel Buildings
Master Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the Degree
Master of Science
in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy
Submitted to Dr. Sabine Sedlacek
Philipp Redl
0811557
Vienna, 10 June 2013

AFFIDAVIT
I hereby affirm that this Masters Thesis represents my own written work and that I have used
no sources and aids other than those indicated. All passages quoted from publications or para-
phrased from these sources are properly cited and attributed.
The thesis was not submitted in the same or in a substantially similar version, not even partial-
ly, to another examination board and was not published elsewhere.
Date Signature
I
II
ABSTRACT
The building sector is one of the main sectors in energy consumption and contributes up
to 30% to the global greenhouse gas emissions (UNEP, 2009). The rising need for infra-
structure and the incredible growth in new construction encourages the building sector
to create a more sustainable construction through the implementation of green building
certificates, which fulfill the tasks of monitoring and improving the energy efficiency.
Whereas for office buildings these assessment tools have become quite common, this
has not happened within the hotel industry. This research aims to detect obstacles in
applying the DGNB certification scheme to hotel buildings and explore the main rea-
sons for these barriers. The research methods consist of a review of relevant literature
coupled with the analysis of green building expert interviews and secondary data. The
findings from this research show that the main barriers are the lack of awareness of ho-
teliers as well as guests, the lack of experience of such initiatives in the sector, the di-
verse user groups of hotel buildings and the costs of such initiatives. This master thesis
recommends pushing a clear and transparent communication about such initiatives
through green marketing activities and additional incentives to increase awareness and
additional market demand.
Keywords: green building certificates, DGNB, hotel buildings, sustainable construction
III
IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Though only my name appears on the cover of this thesis, many people have contribut-
ed to its production. First I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Sabine Sedlacek,
Assistant Professor at the Department of Public Governance at the MODUL University
Vienna, who has supported me throughout my MSc education with useful comments,
remarks and engagement.
Furthermore I would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their
time and contribution with their expert knowledge:
MMAg. Philipp Kaufmann MMAS, President GNI; Dipl. Ing. Thomas Gratzer, Pro-
ject Manager at Michaeler & Partner; Dir. Walter Breg, General Manager Falkensteiner
Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden; Mag. Arch. Gabriel Kacerovsky, Founder of archisphere;
Dipl. Ing. Sven Wnschmann Area Manager of CSD engineers Berlin and Stuttgart;
Dipl. Ing. Slawomira Bukowska, Project Development Expert Porr Solutions Immobi-
lien- und Infrastrukturprojekte GmbH; Dipl. Ing. Yvonne Brandenburger MSc, IQ Real-
Estate GmbH; Angelika Bandke, DGNB Academy; Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Rhle, Intep
GmbH.
Also, I would like to thank my friends and colleagues for their help, encouragement and
support.
Most importantly, I would like to express my gratitude to my family for encouraging

me, keeping me on track and supporting me when things were difficult.
V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Affidavit .......................................................................................................................................... I
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ III
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... V
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... VIII
List of Figures................................................................................................................................ IX
List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... X
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 12
1.1 Problem Background ......................................................................................................... 12
1.2 Research aims and objectives ........................................................................................... 14
1.3 Structure of the thesis....................................................................................................... 15
2 Literature review ............................................................................................................... 16

2.1 Green Buildings and the World Green Building Council ................................................... 16
2.2 The Austrian Sustainable Building Council - GNI ............................................................ 18
2.3 Sustainable Building Assessment ...................................................................................... 19
2.3.1 Sustainable assessment tools ...................................................................................................... 21
2.3.2 BREEAM ....................................................................................................................................... 24
2.3.3 LEED ............................................................................................................................................. 25
2.3.4 Green Globes ............................................................................................................................... 27
2.3.5 DGNB ............................................................................................................................................ 28
2.4 Sustainable Construction in Tourism and its role in Austria ............................................. 31
3 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 36
3.1 Research instrument ......................................................................................................... 36
3.1.1 Qualitative data............................................................................................................................ 37
3.1.2 Secondary Data ............................................................................................................................ 40
3.2 Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 40
4 Analysis.............................................................................................................................. 42
4.1 DGNB criteria analysis ....................................................................................................... 42
4.1.1 Building types ............................................................................................................................... 42
4.1.2 Austrian DGNB criteria assessment ............................................................................................. 43
4.1.3 Austrian DGNB criteria: Hotel buildings vs. Office buildings ........................................................ 44
4.1.4 Adaptation of the system ............................................................................................................. 53
4.2 DGNB certification of hotel buildings ............................................................................... 55
4.2.1 Falkensteiner Hotel and Spa Bad Leonfelden .............................................................................. 57
VI
4.2.2 Interest and Market value ............................................................................................................ 58
4.2.3 Acceptance within the hotel sector .............................................................................................. 61
4.2.4 Design and construction costs ...................................................................................................... 64
4.2.5 Summary of findings ..................................................................................................................... 67
4.3 Document analysis .............................................................................................................67
4.3.1 Triggers Driving Future Green Building Activity ............................................................................ 68
4.3.2 Challenges Increasing Green Building Activity .............................................................................. 69
4.3.3 Benefits of Using a Green Building Rating System ........................................................................ 72
4.3.4 Reasons for Not Using Green Building Rating Systems................................................................. 73
5 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................75
6 Limitations .........................................................................................................................80
7 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................82
Appendices ...................................................................................................................................86
VII
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: New and old building assessment tools ........................................................................ 24
Table 2: Summary of findings ...................................................................................................... 67
Table 3: Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 79
VIII
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: The certification process (GNI, DGNB Systembroschre, 2012) ............................... 30
Figure 2: Range of Certification Fees (GNI, DGNB Systembroschre, 2012)............................ 31
Figure 3: Hotel building structures (Ronning & Brekke, 2009) ................................................... 33
Figure 4: Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................ 41
Figure 5: Assessment classification ............................................................................................. 44
Figure 6: The adaptation process ................................................................................................ 54
Figure 7: Stakeholder perceptions

(World Green Building Council, The Business Case for Green Building, 2013) ........................... 56
Figure 8: Values of Falkensteiner Michaeler Toruism Group (translated in English)

(FMTG - Falkensteiner Michaeler Tourism Group AG, 2010)...................................................... 57
Figure 9: Triggers Driving Future Green Building Activity

(McGraw Hill Construction, 2013)............................................................................................... 69
Figure 10: Challenges to Increasing Green Building Activity

(McGraw Hill Construction, 2013) .............................................................................................. 70
Figure 11: Benefits of Using a Green Building Rating System

Figure 12: Reasons for Not Using Green Building Rating Systems
IX
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
EPDB European Performance of Building Directive

EU European Union
GHG Green House Gas
KWh/m Kilowatt-hour per square-meter
GNI sterreichische Gesellschaft fr Nachhaltige Immobilienwirtschaft (Austrian
Sustainable Building Council)
DGNB Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Nachhaltiges Bauen (German Sustainable Building

Council)
GDP Gross Domestic Product

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
BREEAM British Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
US United States
USGBC US Green Building Council
WorldGBC World Green Building Council
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
GBC Green Building Council
CED Cumulative Energy Demand
LCA Life Cycle Analysis
TQA Total Quality Assessment
SME Small and medium enterprises
UNWTO United Nations World Tourism Organization
UV Ultraviolet
DIN Deutsches Institut fr Normung (German Institute for Standardization)
HT sterreichische Hotel und Tourismusbank (Austrian Hotel and Tourism Bank)
GBCM Green Building Council Member

PM Project Manager
GM General Manager
ARCH Architect
X
XI
SUSTAINABLE BUILDING CERTIFICATION THE CASE OF HOTEL BUILDINGS
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem Background
Growing greenhouse gas emissions, on-going climate change and the continuing in-
crease in energy demand need a rethinking in order to avoid more global warming. Ac-
cording to the United Nations Environment Program, the building sector is one of the
main sectors in energy consumption and adds up to 30% of the global greenhouse gas
emissions (UNEP, 2009). The rising need for infrastructure and the incredible growth in
new construction encourage the building sector to create a more sustainable construc-
tion through the implementation of green specifications. The potential for greater ener-
gy and pollution reduction of this sector is much higher than for any other. With the
help of available technologies the reduction potential is estimated up to 30-80% in long-
term costs. Nevertheless the building sector is a very complicated one as such a high
number of stakeholders with different economic interests regarding energy efficiency
are involved (Lam, Chan, Poon, Chau, & Chun, 2009). Therefore the role of govern-
ments in encouraging the building sector to move towards sustainability is of high im-
portance. As a consequence, the European Union has formed a department working on
actions, laws and regulations to reduce the energy consumption and therefore the energy
demand within Europe (Hwang & Tan, 2010). As a key part of the legislation the Ener-
gy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) was implemented in 2006. The EPDB
prescribes the compulsory certification of buildings in the EU and tackles energy de-
pendency via actions aimed at reducing consumption (Andaloro, Salomone, Ioppolo, &
Andaloro, 2010). In addition it covers the energy needs for space and hot water heating,
cooling and lighting. It is designed to take local requirements and conditions into ac-
count. However it is still not implemented in all European countries (EPBD Building
Platform, 2008). Many companies in this sector wish to have room for flexibility. As a
result the implementation of environmentally friendly measures still rely on many vol-
untary assessment schemes. Such building certification programs fulfil the tasks of
monitoring and improving the energy efficiency in the construction sector (Kibert,
2008). A number of such certificates already exist all over the world and a few of them
will be discussed and compared later.
12
Also Austria faces the problem that heating and cooling energy accounts as the second
highest greenhouse gas producer of the country. Therefore the Austrian Government
established together with the Kyoto Protocol the Austrian Climate Strategy to reduce
GHG emissions drastically (Lebensministerium V/4, 2012). The main issues in this
strategy are: the renovation of buildings including installing improved insulation, the re-
design of transportation (road pricing for trucks, the extension of train infrastructure),
the promotion of renewable energies, reducing the Methane emissions of waste sites and
reducing the use of synthetic GHG-active gases. Consequently in 2008 Austria imple-
mented the EPBD based on nine different building codes in each of the nine provinces
with different regulations regarding energy. In 2006 the development of a common cal-
culation method was agreed upon and as a result implemented by the Austrian Institute
of Construction Engineering. The energy performance certificate (Energieausweis) is
based on calculated values and is assigned to residential and non-residential buildings or
building units. It rates in 9 energy performance levels from A++ (high energy efficien-
cy) to G (low efficiency) and measures the heat energy demand in kWh/m and year as a
key factor of the certificate. This certificate was mandatory for all newly constructed
buildings and major renovations since 2008 (Jilek, 2011). As of 1.12.2012 the new En-
ergy Performance Certificate Presentation Law requires every landlord or seller, but
also every broker and agent to present the energy performance certificate, which is valid
for ten years. Within these strategies the real estate and building sector plays an im-
portant role in order to create more sustainable construction processes. Also the Austri-
an climate strategy was updated in 2007 and new goals like the increase of renewable
energy technologies or the improvement of energy intensity in the final consumption of
buildings were formulated (Lebensministerium V/4, 2012). However Austria, as a small
country, was not able to establish a pioneering role in the sector of green buildings and
can now learn from other countries and include their experience. In order to increase the
public awareness and the knowledge of green buildings within the industry, the Austri-
an Sustainable Building Council GNI has been formed which made a contract with
the DGNB certificate, an already very well established building certification scheme in
Germany. This certification program focuses on awarding sustainable blue buildings. In
comparison to green buildings, blue buildings differ in that they do not only focus on
structures and processes that are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient
throughout the building's life-cycle. They also include the socio-cultural factors, mean-
ing the careful use of energy resources and the consideration of human needs. Blue
13
buildings focus more on the users of the building and not only on the usage of sustaina-
ble construction materials (GNI, Nachhaltiges Bauen und Bewirtschaften. Etablierung
der sterreichischen Gesellschaft fr Nachhaltige Immobilienwirtschaft", 2009). This
will be explained in more detail in chapter 2.3.
Specific types of commercial buildings are characterized by a higher demand for energy
and resources. These also include hotel and hospitality buildings, which consume much
more energy and resources per guest than residential buildings per inhabitant. As the
tourism sector is the second most important one in Austria, the development of sustain-
able concepts could contribute to the saving of resources. Additionally the alarming
trends of climate change and global warming should provide motivation for more effi-
cient use of energy resources in the accommodation industry. This need has been dis-
covered by the Austrian Sustainability Building Council as well. As a result the DGNB
certification program was adapted with the help of one pioneering project, the Falken-
steiner Hotel and Resort Bad Leonfelden, to the needs of this special type of building in
order to prepare the certification process for further projects in this building typology.
1.2 Research aims and objectives
Currently in Austria there is only one hotel building certified with the DGNB certifica-
tion and ten hotels in Germany. However there have already been three different ver-
sions of certification catalogues for the new construction of hotel buildings. As a result,
assuming that there have been problems with applying the DGNB certification to hotel
buildings, which is tailor-made for office buildings, the purpose of this master thesis
will be to answer the following research question:
What kinds of obstacles in applying the DGNB certification scheme on hotel buildings
are evident and how can they be overcome?
In order to better work out this short coming in the special case of hotel buildings, a
document analysis of primary and secondary documents and reports will be performed,
where the application of the DGNB certification scheme on hotel buildings will be then
compared to the one on office buildings.
So as to better accomplish these goals, a macro study of the Austrian hotel market will
be needed. This will include the latest figures on how big the hotel market is in Austria,
14
which proportion it has on the GDP and most importantly how much it contributes to
the emission amount of Austria in general. Most importantly, to better understand how
this certification scheme is working, a detailed overview on the DGNB certification
scheme will be provided and will be compared with other certification schemes like
LEED, Green Globes or BREEAM. The comparison will include the certification pro-
cess, the costs, the third-party verification and the certification criteria. In addition, the
difference between the types of buildings and how the certification of a hotel building
differs from an office or residential building will be discussed. The access to the internal
database of the Austrian Sustainable Building Council will help to better identify and
assess the differences within the versions of certification criteria catalogues.
1.3 Structure of the thesis
This master thesis consists of five major sections.
The first section provides the introduction to the study and includes a short overview on
the main problem being addressed. In addition, it highlights the main objectives of the
study and presents how the research has been conducted in order to provide an answer
to the proposed research question.
The second section provides an extensive background of the most important theoretical
concepts. It describes the main theory of green building and green building certification
schemes and compares the different systems.
In the third section the entire research procedure, including the creation of the concep-
tual framework and the collection of data is described.
The following section is devoted to the results and analysis of the data and the cross-
checking of the expert interviews with secondary data.
The master thesis ends with conclusions and recommendations, followed by the limita-
tions of the study.
15
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Green Buildings and the World Green Building Council
The concept of green building was developed in the 1980s as a consequence of the
alarming trends of climate change, increasing CO2 emissions and the scarcity of re-
sources. As already mentioned, buildings are responsible for more than 40% of the
global greenhouse gas emissions. At the present time China, the US, the European Un-
ion, India, Russia and Japan contribute to the majority of carbon dioxide emissions. The
rapid growth of emissions especially in the rest of Asia, Brazil and other areas in the
world and the fast development of urban civilization will put more pressure on the need
for global reduction of the carbon footprint. According to Yudelson (2007) half of the
new building over the next 30 years will occur in China alone. Therefore a focus on
energy-efficient and green buildings will be major part of the fight against increasing
climate change issues. Not only are emissions a major problem, the scarcity of water is
another reason for adopting green building techniques. New technologies in water con-
servation and wastewater treatment will reduce the water use in construction by half and
also the use of renewable energy technologies are very important for urbanizing areas.
Additionally, green buildings can help to secure a fairer distribution of resources by
providing affordable housing for the poor. Resource efficient buildings are on the one
hand cheaper to operate and on the other hand many renewable energy technologies are
ready to provide healthcare and education in developing and resource-poor communi-
ties. Moreover indoor quality, comfort health and safety issues are increasing through
the use of more environmentally friendly building materials (Ding, 2008).
As a consequence, the American Institute of Architects created the Committee on the
Environment in the late 1980s. This association of architects had the main focus to-
wards sustainable design. A few years later in 1993 the US Green Building Council
(USGBC) was created, which tried to lead the building and construction industry into
more environmentally responsible activity.
The USGBC defines the term green building as buildings which incorporate design
and construction practices that significantly reduce or eliminate the negative impact of
buildings on the environment and occupants in five broad areas:
Sustainable site planning
16
Safeguarding water and water efficiency

Energy efficiency and renewability
Conservation of materials and resources
Indoor environmental quality (Yudelson, 2007).
These ideas and concepts were then exported globally and Great Britain created their
own Green Building Council at the same time. As a consequence many other countries
like Canada, Australia, France or Japan developed their own Green Building Councils
and certifications for green buildings which are now working together under the um-
brella of the World Green Building Council (Makkie, 2010).
The World Green Building Council (WorldGBC) was created in 1999 as a consequence
of the development of national green building councils in the United States, Australia,
Canada, Japan, Spain, Russia, United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. Its mis-
sion is to foster and support new and emerging Green Business Councils by providing
them with the tools and strategies to establish strong organizations and leadership posi-
tions in their countries ( World Green Building Council, About World GBC, 2013).
Green building councils are, according to the definition of WorldGBC (2013) member-
based organizations that empower industry leaders to affect the transformation of the
local building industry towards sustainability. They are non-profit and non-government
organizations formed by all members of regional sectors of the property industry. These
include planners, policymakers, designers and developers, to building owners, managers
and tenants. The actions of Green Building Councils are often concentrated to certain
regions and climates.
In addition the construction industry is a very complex industry including a high num-
ber of stakeholders. These include not only architects, designers, developers, govern-
ment agencies, financial institutions but also the community as an interested and affect-
ed group of stakeholders. All of the stakeholders often have different interests when
constructing a building (Cole, Motivating stakeholders to deliver environmental change,
2011). Whereas investors are mainly interested in the costs and economic performance,
occupants are more interested in the indoor quality and health of the building and their
own comfort within the building environment. Staff, who are working in the buildings,
are essentially aware of the maintainability and the practical use of the building (Cole,
Emerging trends in building environmental assessment methods, 1998). However all of
17
the different stakeholders are strongly dependent on each other and interconnected with-
in the construction process. In order to reach a more sustainable consensus within the
construction industry the information exchange needs to be improved. According to
Cole (2011) new forms of cooperation and information exchange need to be devel-
oped. In addition a more cooperative environment between the different stakeholders,
academia and government needs to be established (World Green Building Council, The
Business Case for Green Building, 2013).
As sustainability includes next to the economy, the environment and society in its three
pillars system, the socio-ecological system represents an important player in the shift
toward more sustainable buildings. This has, according to du Plessis & Cole (2011), not
a voice like the other stakeholders in the decision making process, however it is often
represented through intermediaries like non-governmental or community-based organi-
zations. It is also questioned if the role of natural environment needs an active voice, as
the construction of buildings happens in it anyways. As a result the individual citizens
guide the actions in the building of the environment as all the internal stakeholders of a
construction project will be affected by the negative or positive impacts of the projects
in the end, through asset value or operations costs (du Plessis & Cole, 2011).
Through the formation of the green building councils mentioned above, the stakeholders
are becoming increasingly aware of more resource consciousness within the construc-
tion sector. However the complexity within the sector and the natural environment of it,
limits the further development of existing policies and regulations, subsidies or incen-
tives to change. A multi-stakeholder consensus and cross-sectional approach, including
all project- internal stakeholders, as well as the public in policy-making, would there-
fore promote more sustainable actions and solutions. This would potentially also be
driver for creating new incentives and policy instruments to foster the move towards the
sustainability paradigm (du Plessis & Cole, 2011).
2.2 The Austrian Sustainable Building Council - GNI
The Austrian Sustainability Building Council (GNI) is the local partner organization
of DGNB for Austria. It is a non-profit organization that collaborates closely with sev-
eral universities, politicians, businesses, architects and other organizations. The goal of
this organization is to strengthen and improve the position of green and especially blue
18
buildings in Austria. It works and operates under the umbrella of the World Green
Building Council and includes the application of green building strategies from the
planning through construction until the operation of the buildings. Especially the fact
that people spend more than 94% of their lifetime in buildings should lead to more
healthy and resource friendly construction and usage for future generations. In order to
fulfill these goals the GNI uses the German sustainable building certification scheme
DGNB, which is already well established. With the GNI organization the DGNB
scheme has been established in Austria, which ensures for both building owners and
operators, that the building was planned, constructed and built in a sustainable way and
that it will meet all the requirements and wishes in the operation (GNI, 2012).
2.3 Sustainable Building Assessment
As already mentioned before, both commercial and residential buildings are consuming
substantial portions of energy resources especially in developed countries. Additionally
the construction sector as a whole is responsible for many other environmentally harm-
ful issues. Therefore many governments have created laws to make the building sector
greener and green building measures mandatory in creating new buildings (Hwang &
Tan, 2010). According to the IPCC this sector has the highest potential in reducing
emissions and energy saving. In order to better promote and gain a broader understand-
ing and acceptance, green building assessment tools need to be designed and applied.
Therefore a number of rating systems were created in order to better identify, measure
and assess the sustainable construction of buildings. These systems also support many
public and private developers to promote the aspects of resource efficiency, value reten-
tion and optimizing user comfort in green buildings and the sustainable construction
sector. There is still confusion about the terms green building, blue building and sus-
tainable construction. As there are many different definitions about green buildings, it is
generally spoken a building that is energy and resource efficient and has minimal dis-
ruptions to the environment (Hwang & Tan, 2010). On the other hand, according to
Kibert (2008) sustainable construction concentrates more on the ecological, social and
economic issues of a building in the context of its community. Consistent with this
definition green building is therefore a subdivision of sustainable construction. Blue
buildings are more similar to sustainable construction and contain in addition to all the
characteristics of green building, the life-cycle costs, market value, waste prevention or
19
waste management. Furthermore, blue buildings concentrate more on features like the
quality of outdoor spaces, the micro conditions of the location, access to transportation
or the ability for recycling and dismantling of the hotel building after time. Basically
blue buildings include more than just energy and resource efficiency and take the users
role of the building also into consideration (Auinger, 2012).
The same confusion exists with sustainable rating systems at the moment. They are used
worldwide except in major parts of Africa and Latin America. However the growing
number of certified buildings shows that the demand for rating system and sustainable
buildings is increasing.
Often these assessment tools are accompanied by third-party verification. These third
parties are in the majority of the cases the Green Building Councils (GBCs). As they are
non-governmental organizations they are supported by the private industry, either in the
form of sponsorship or membership fees. The use of third party verification secures on
the one hand the transparency of the assessment process and eliminates the chance of
cheating. As GBCs want to be seen by the public as reliable and valuable institutions
they are highly interested in forming standards and practicing them. Therefore they can
establish themselves as essential governance institutions (Sedlacek & Maier, 2012).
However GBCs are market driven organizations by the private industry. On the other
hand there are also policies and regulatory instruments which are used for assessing
sustainable construction. Especially at larger scales, assessment methods are directed by
legislation or by strategic planning needs of local governments. Especially in these cas-
es the multi-stakeholder participation and cooperation of all stakeholders in the legisla-
tion process is of essential importance (du Plessis & Cole, 2011).
In addition the assessment tools are often divided into qualitative and quantitative
measures. Especially quantitative measures have their source in larger scaled problems
and are downsized in order to make the assessment easier. Examples would be the car-
bon emissions per square meter or the bicycle tracks per occupant of the building. How-
ever these indicators are very much criticized. Therefore a more integrative approach of
assessment methods is necessary where all related impacts, multiple perspectives and
the significant linkages between the ecological, technical and institutional systems are
taken into account. These should be secured through a stronger engagement of an ex-
20
panded consulting team beginning in the design phase of a project (du Plessis & Cole,
2011).
2.3.1 Sustainable assessment tools
Differentiation is possible between three main groups of sustainable assessment tools:

Cumulative energy demand (CED) systems, which focus on energy consump-
tion,
Life cycle analysis (LCA) systems, which focus on environmental aspects,
Total quality assessment (TQA) systems, which evaluate ecological, economic
and social aspects (Berardi, 2011).
Cumulative energy demand systems focus more on the energy consumption of a build-
ing. Usually only the energy for heating and hot water is measured with these systems.
The weakness of CED systems is that they do not capture other sources of energy within
a building like air conditioning, lighting, ventilation, entertainment and telecommunica-
tions. Essentially the energy demand is measured over a certain period of time, mostly
one year. What is only considered at a small stage is the energy used for the construc-
tion, the transportation of the material and the manufacture of the building material
(Berardi, 2011).
In comparison to CED systems, a life cycle analysis system focuses on the particular
products and processes in detail. It measures the environmental impact of a building
over its whole life cycle from manufacturing to deconstruction and recycling. Strength
of this analysis is that certain criterions are measured with every building and therefore
it is quite easy to compare the different products. It describes the quality of durability
of a project over its entire usage. However there are different building materials re-
quired during the construction phase in every country. Although databases for LCA
systems in certain geographic areas were designed already to make the evaluation easi-
er, there is still lack of information in the building sector. In addition these LCA sys-
tems often contain very complicated chemical and specialist terms and it is commonly
very hard to understand by the different stakeholders and actors of the construction sec-
tor. Besides LCA systems just focus on the environmental aspects of sustainable con-
struction and completely ignore the social and economic impacts of the building
(Berardi, 2011).
21
The third type of sustainable rating systems is total quality assessment systems which
focus on the three pillars of sustainability. The following chapters will focus on this
group of assessment tools. Generally the evaluation with the help of these systems is
based on a number of indicators which help to compare the real performance with
norms and reference ones. Each of the indicators is weighted with points which are
summed up and represent the level of sustainability in the end. The demand for these
systems is increasing in the last years, as they focus both on the market interests but also
on the stakeholders interests. In addition they are quite easy to understand and to com-
prehend, as the different indicators are well explained and do not contain many special-
ist terms. Another advantage of the TQA systems is that they can be applied at several
stages of construction. Usually there are different versions for the different building
types and the different stages, from conception through the construction process to the
final building (Berardi, 2011).
After the creation of the first environmental building assessment method BREEAM in
1990, many other similar assessment tools have been developed all over the world. The
basis for most of the environmental building assessment tools are life-cycle assessment
databases (Ding, 2008). In addition green building assessments create a verifiable and
comparable set of indicators to enable building owners pushing for higher environmen-
tal standards a means of demonstrating that aims. Moreover they gather detailed infor-
mation for building owners about increasing occupancy rates, lower operating and
maintenance costs and an increased marketability and as a result reduced vacancies.
Likewise assessed buildings increase the corporate image and prestige values, lower
transaction costs and refurbishment costs for developers, owners as well as tenants. Fur-
thermore they guarantee higher sales prices and quicker sales and therefore a more rapid
return on investment. Especially since the economic crisis such buildings guarantee a
higher future value on the real estate market. Also the risk of extreme weather events
and changing weather patterns are reduced as the insurability of real estate is increased
through this means of communicating a green building (World Green Building Council,
The Business Case for Green Building, 2013).
Finally green building assessment tools support the creation of know-how and expertise
within the building design team and the industry as a whole to ease the adaptation of
environmental issues into practice.
22
Table 1 list the different the old and new building assessment methods used in different
countries.
Assessment methods Origin Characteristics References

performance-based accredited
assessment tool
one to five star rating scale
national approach to benchmark- (Seo, Tucker,
Australian Building
AGBR Australia ing greenhouse performance of Ambrose, Mitchell, &
Greenhouse Rating buildings and tenancies Wang, 2006)
Based on 12 months of energy
consumption
First and most widely used
British Research Estab- 9 different criteria categories
4 levels of achievement
BREEAM lishment Environmen- UK (Reeder, 2010)
Evaluation by a trained and
tal Assessment Method licensed third-party assessor
co-operative project between
industry and government
Applicable in accordance with (Yau, Cheng, & Yin,
the stages of a development in
Comprehensive as- 2006) (Cole, Building
pre-design, new construction, ex-
sessment system for isting building and renovation environmental
CASBEE Japan
building environmental based on the concept of closed assessment methods:
efficiency ecosystems to determine the en- redefining intentions
vironmental capacities
Consideration for regional char- and roles, 2005)
acter
Developed by the German Green
Building Council
developed to create an industrial
standard
third-party verified assessing
Deutsches Gtesiegel system awards rating of bronze,
DGNB Germany silver and gold (DGNB, 2013)
fr Nachhaltiges Bauen For 18 new and existing building
typologies
5 +1 areas of sustainability
Voluntary tool
Used in 16 countries worldwide
Introduced by the Science and
Technology Development Pro-
moting Centre and Ministry of
Construction
The first environmental standards
and design guidelines related to
Green home evaluation performance standards (Yau, Cheng, & Yin,
GHEM China
manual Only relates to residential pro- 2006)
jects
Simple rating that without explic-
it weighting system to address re-
sources allocation and indoor en-
vironmental quality
4 levels of certification
5 areas of sustainability
Green Globes Canada Existing and new commercial (Reeder, 2010)
and multifamily residential pro-
jects
separate assessment methods for
new and existing office buildings
criticized as assessing the quanti-
fiable criteria but not the non-
quantifiable social and environ-
Hong Kong building mental issues (Yau, Cheng, & Yin,
HKBEAM environmental assess- Hong Kong Assessing new building as built 2006) (Reeder, 2010)
ment method rather than as designed (Davies, 2001)
process not transparent
categorized under the global,
local & indoor scales
Emphasis on life-cycle impacts
23
of environmental issues
ranging from fair to excellent
Developed by the US Green
Building Council
developed to create an industrial
standard
Self-assessing system awards
rating of certified, silver, gold
Leadership in energy and platinum
LEED and environmental USA Use simple checklist format to (Reeder, 2010)
design rate building performance
For new and existing commer-
cial, institutional, high-rise resi-
dential & major renovation
5 areas of sustainability
voluntary tool
Performance criteria that
acknowledge social and econom- (Cole, Building
ic issues
Divide 15 performance areas into environmental
Sustainable building
SBAT South Africa 5 performance criteria assessment methods:
assessment tool
Integral part of building process redefining intentions
based on the typical life cycle of
and roles, 2005)
a building
TABLE 1: NEW AND OLD BUILDING ASSESSMENT TOOLS
In the following chapters the four most commonly used rating systems in Europe and
Austria will be further explained and compared.
2.3.2 BREEAM
The first multi-criterion assessment scheme for buildings was designed and launched in
the United Kingdom in 1990. The British Building Research Establishment Environ-
mental Assessment Method (BREEAM) was designed and implemented by the British
Research Establishment. It was implemented before the topic was discussed in the Rio
Conference in 1992 and serves as a basis for many international policies on green build-
ings. Since its implementation it has developed to the worlds leading assessment tool
with over 250,000 certified buildings in more than 50 countries. This trend emerged in
2008, when global attention was paid to the system and an international version has
been released. It concentrates on the sustainable performance of buildings and includes
evaluation indicators at a broad range from ecology to economy. These include energy
and water use, the internal environment (health and well-being), pollution, transport,
materials, waste, ecology and management processes. It offers several versions for dif-
ferent stages of construction, reaching from the planning stage of communities, over the
new construction of buildings, the new construction of residential buildings, an in-use
assessment, up to refurbishment and renovation of existing buildings. In addition the
system differentiates between 12 building types including residential, educational, in-
dustrial, retail, office buildings but also prisons, healthcare institutions, datacenters,
24
courts, community buildings, entertainment and leisure buildings and other buildings
and mixed use developments.
The system is designed to start using it in the design stage. An assessor or auditor will
be then contacted and will help the project developer from registering for the assess-
ment to getting certified. The assessor or auditor is a qualified and licensed person who
understands the process and technical issues covered by the scheme. Their responsibil-
ity is to understand each issue and requirement to the scheme and communicate them to
the client and project team. Generally BREEAM is used not only by private clients,
planners, development agencies, funders and developers but also by property agents and
managers to promote the benefits of a rated building or to reduce costs and ensure a
more efficient use of the buildings.
The evaluation of the system is expressed as a percentage of successful over total points
as follows: 25% for pass classification, 40% for good, 55% for very good, 70% for ex-
cellent and 85% for outstanding.
The costs for BREEAM depend on the requirements and services required from the li-
censed BREEAM project assessor. The assessor will the base the price on the assess-
ment of the building and will add extra services like consultancy advice or guiding the
client through the whole assessment process. Besides, these costs vary with project size,
complexity and other factors (BRE Global, 2010-212).
2.3.3 LEED
The second big international rating system is the Leadership in Energy and Environ-
mental Design (LEED) released by the US Green Building Council in 1998. It is a vol-
untary, third party evaluation of green buildings for building owners and operators. It is
one of the TQA systems, as it considers all three aspects of sustainability. The system is
the USs biggest rating tool for sustainable construction and green buildings and is
spread over 135 countries worldwide. Basically LEED differentiates between commer-
cial and neighborhood buildings and home buildings. In total it is currently available for
10 different building typologies including residential buildings, commercial, retail,
neighborhood development, schools, healthcare buildings, existing buildings, core and
shell development, and refurbishment and renovation. As already mentioned, LEED
differentiates basically between two major assessments, one for home and residential
25
buildings only and one other for the rest of typologies (Reeder, 2010). Within the two
programs the buildings have to meet certain standards and earn points for them. The
rating standards are categorized in five main groups including sustainable site credits
focusing on the impact on the ecosystem and water resources. Secondly, it includes wa-
ter efficiency to reduce water consumption; thirdly, energy and atmosphere credits,
which concentrates on the energy performance of the building. Another category is ma-
terial and resources, which includes the use of sustainable materials and waste reduc-
tion. The last of the main categories focuses on indoor environmental quality, where the
assessment includes the indoor air quality and the access to daylight. In addition LEED
offers criteria for location and linkage, neighborhood pattern and design, awareness and
education and two optional categories in innovation in design and operations and in
regional priority (USGBC, 2013).
For home buildings a project must meet all the prerequisites and earn at least 45 points
out of 136. Commercial and neighborhood buildings on the other hand need to reach 40
out of 110 points. Certified (minimum 45 points for home and 40 for commercial build-
ings), silver (60-74 points for home and 50-59 for commercial buildings), gold (75-89
points for home and 60-79 for commercial buildings) and platinum (90+ points and
above for home and 80+ for commercial buildings) are the four different reachable per-
formance levels. The rating scheme consists of 67 credits, which describe in more detail
the main categories mentioned above. It is organized as a third-party verification includ-
ing project providers and Green Raters. Providers are members of the USGBC, the US
green building council and are responsible for providing certification services in their
geographical market areas. Additionally their duties include the recruitment and regis-
tration of projects for LEED, the coordination of the Green Raters team and the certifi-
cation of LEED projects. Green Raters are individual persons which are part of the pro-
vider team, but are working closely together with the specific project teams, project
designers and construction professionals. In addition they are helping the project teams
during the construction process and conduct regular inspections and performance tests.
The participation in the LEED program generally consists of five steps. The first is to
choose the specific rating system to use dependent on the building type. This step is
followed by the registration of the project, where the project is then listed in LEED
online. LEED online is a management tool for all the team members, where responsibil-
ities, prerequisites and all progresses are tracked. It helps to consider all the credits for
26
the design and construction phase. The next step is to submit all the documentation
online, which is then reviewed either only at the end of construction or at the end of
both design and construction phase. The last step is then the certification decision,
which can be accepted or appealed.
The costs for the assessment are very difficult to specify as they vary in terms of project
complexity, size, and construction market but also in terms of membership and the
phases assessed (USGBC, 2013).
2.3.4 Green Globes

Green Globes was established by a private Canadian non-profit organization in 1996.
Basis for this assessment scheme was the United Kingdoms BREEAM system, when
BREEAM Canada was established. In 2000 the system was further developed, becom-
ing an online-tool named Green Globes for Existing Buildings. In 2004 it was spread
throughout the borders of Canada to the United States by the Green Building Initiative,
which is still the awarding organization (Reeder, 2010). Until now more than 480 build-
ings are certified in Canada and the United States and more than 5000 are registered. It
can be used for a large variety of building typologies, from existing buildings to newly
constructed ones. It is only used for commercial buildings of all sizes, institutional
buildings like hospitals, courthouses or universities and multi-family structures (GBI T.
G.).
The assessment is based on a 1000 point scale available online in a comprehensive
online assessment protocol. The indicators used are in the categories of energy (380
points), water (85 points), resources (100 points), emissions (70 points), indoor envi-
ronment (200 points), project management (50 points), and site (115 points) for new
construction. For existing buildings, the categories project management and site are not
considered, instead there are available criteria in the area of environmental manage-
ment.
There are four levels of certification available, which are scored as a percentage of
points achieved. At least 35% of the 1000 points are necessary to be eligible for the cer-
tification of one, two, three or four Green Globes. The first stage (35-54%) demon-
strates a commitment to environmental efficiency practices (GBI, 2013), followed by
the second (55-69%) which shows an excellent process in the reduction of environ-
mental impacts and use of environmental efficiency practices (GBI, 2013). Receiving
the three Green Globes certificate (70-84%) means that the project demonstrates lead-
27
ership in applying best practices regarding energy, water and environmental efficiency
(GBI, 2013). The best and last category (85-100%) proves national leadership and ex-
cellence in the practice of energy, water and environmental efficiency to reduce envi-
ronmental impacts (GBI, 2013).
The assessment process is divided into five main stages. The first one is to purchase the
Green Globes online evaluation tool. The online building assessment as well as the con-
struction documents survey needs to then be completed. The next step consists of the
request for a third-party assessment and certification (if meeting the 35% minimum
threshold). Subsequently, the third-party assessment starts with the review of the con-
struction documents, landscape designs, the energy analysis and a life-cycle analysis
documentation. The second part of the third-party assessment contains an on-site build-
ing evaluation, the review of additional documentation and interviews with the key team
members. This stage is carried out by independent and Green Globes licensed experts in
green building design, engineering and construction. They interact with the different
project teams and building owners during the whole period of assessment and on-site
building tours. After successfully completing the third-party assessment, the last stage is
to receive a Green Globe rating and certification for the building.
The Green Globes certificate is, compared to other systems, relatively cost-saving. Just
the registration and the software need to be bought in the beginning. The third-party
assessment depends on the size of the building and is a fixed amount of money. There
are no costs for membership, or any extra fees added to the above mentioned expenses
(GBI, 2013).
2.3.5 DGNB
The DGNB certification scheme was first established by the German Sustainable Build-
ing Council (Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Nachhaltiges Bauen) in cooperation with actors
from the construction and real estate industry in 2007. Their main aim was to assess
environmentally-friendly, resource and economically efficient buildings. Another im-
portant issue was to transfer know-how and raise public awareness on sustainable con-
struction. Today the council counts more than 1200 members worldwide. As already
mentioned this system was first available in Germany, until it was adapted to Austrias
construction and green building requirements by the GNI in 2009.
Compared to LEED and BREEAM, the DGNB certificate is a very flexible certification
scheme as it can be easily adapted to country-specific requirements and to various
28
building typologies. Therefore it is used at the moment for 18 typologies including ex-
isting and new office (31 in Austria), administrative, educational (3 in Austria), com-
mercial (9 in Austria), residential and mixed-use buildings (5 in Austria), but also hospi-
tals, industry buildings (3 in Austria) and hotels (2 in Austria, one being planned) and
entire city districts. The certification is based on European norms and standards. An
authorized DGNB auditor then concentrates on geographically specific requirements,
which allows the system to be applied in more than 20 countries worldwide (GNI,
DGNB Systembroschre, 2012).
Generally the DGNB certification is based on the six key aspects of sustainable build-
ing: environmental, economic, sociocultural and functional aspects, technical quality,
process quality and site quality with more than 60 criteria in total, which will be de-
scribed and analyzed in more detail later. Based on the three pillar system of sustaina-
bility the first four aspects have equal weight (22, 5%) in the certification. This high-
lights the equal importance of the economic and the sociocultural criteria with the envi-
ronmental and technical quality criteria. The remaining 10% pay attention to the process
quality. What is measured separately is the site quality. Not only is the equal importance
of the criteria, but also the whole life cycle of a building a main focus of the DGNB
certificate.
Three levels of certification can be received with the DGNB system. Each criterion is
allotted up to ten points, which are then condensed in a partial score. As already men-
tioned above, the site quality is considered separately, however it can increase the final
level of certification. The three levels are bronze (50 - 64%), silver (65 - 79%) and gold
(80 - 100%). In addition to the total score, it is necessary to reach a specific minimum
level in each of the assessment sections. For example a gold certificate necessitates at
least 65 % in the first five assessment sections (DGNB, 2013).
The DGNB certificate should be implemented as early as possible in the planning

phase. A pre-certification ensures that the targets are clear for each member of the plan-
ning team and improves the transparency and risk management of the whole project. In
addition, the pre-certificate runs alongside all the other processes and it helps to save
money in the construction. The DGNB system ensures assistance from the planning
stage throughout the entire construction to the accomplishment of the building.
29
FIGURE 1: THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS (GNI, DGNB SYSTEMBROSCHRE, 2012)
30
As figure 1 shows, the DGNB certification process is divided into four stages: the prep-
aration and registration, submitting documents, compliancy testing and awarding of the
certificate (DGNB, 2013). In the preparation and registration stage the client contacts an
independent DGNB auditor, who supports the project and client throughout the whole
process. In addition the client needs to register the project with the DGNB system and
sign the certification contract. In the second stage, the submitting documents stage, the
auditor creates all the necessary documents for the assessment of the sustainable build-
ing according to the DGNB system criteria. Subsequently the documents are submitted
to the DGNB office for compliancy testing. This is done by independent DGNB audi-
tors and sent back to the project auditor. After that additional documents are added if
necessary and the second compliancy testing follows. If all parties agree on the second
test report, the results are confirmed by the DGNB Certification Committee. In the last
stage the pre-certificate or certificate for the project is awarded to the client at one of the
DGNB events or the official building opening to increase public awareness (DGNB,
2013).
As with many of the other certification schemes the costs for the certification differ
from building to building depending on size, complexity and other factors of the project.
However figure 2 below gives an overview of the estimated costs of certification. Costs
for the independent auditor are not included in this overview (DGNB, 2013).
FIGURE 2: RANGE OF CERTIFICATION FEES (GNI, DGNB SYSTEMBROSCHRE, 2012)
2.4 Sustainable Construction in Tourism and its role in Austria
About 2/3 of the total GHG emissions within the building sector can be associated to
residential buildings, as they dominate the green business market. Nevertheless there are
31
specific types of commercial buildings, which are often characterized by a high energy
and resource demand. The hospitality industry including hotel buildings is one of them.
The energy use in hospitality buildings and the resulting environmental impacts are
generally greater than those produced by comparable buildings of a similar size. This
happens due to the 24-hour based operation and the high comfort level demanded by
many travelers (Filimonau, Dickinson, Robbins, & Huijbregts, 2011). Hotel buildings
aim to provide the best service possible to guests to desire experiences and enjoy their
holidays and free time at certain levels of luxury (Schuetze, 2012). However there is
also a demand of guests to feel that their actions are environmentally responsible, so a
stay in a hotel, which ensures hospitality both to the guests and the environment (Sloan,
Legrand, & Chen, 2009). According to a guest questionnaire at the Austrian Falken-
steiner Hotels and Resorts, which will be part of the analysis, 59% of their guests would
be willing to pay more for an environmentally friendly hotel in order to show a positive
commitment for the environment (Maly, 2012).
However within the hospitality industry the opinion of a decrease in comfort, ambience
and the guests enjoyable experience when applying more sustainable and environmen-
tally friendly alternatives is present. Through the fast development of technology and
greater environmental awareness this can be changed. When integrating concepts of
energy efficiency and resource conservation already in the planning and designing of a
hotel building, no advanced expertise and excessive investments are necessary (Sloan,
Legrand, & Chen, 2009).
32
FIGURE 3: HOTEL BUILDING STRUCTURES (RONNING & BREKKE, 2009)
Figure 3 shows the complex building typology of hotel construction. The figure does
not only contain the construction, but the whole life of a hotel building including opera-
tion, maintenance and demolition. It tries to display the multi-functional characteristics
of the building and clearly demonstrates the different sources of environmental impacts
during the whole life-cycle of the building and its operation.
Nevertheless all the environmentally responsible actions are strongly dependent on the
hoteliers attitude and knowledge. Especially small and medium sized enterprise (SME)
hotels can hardly be targeted through a labeling initiative. On the other hand chain-
affiliated hotels often integrate environmental issues in their company policies, which
are then applied in every single property. According to Hotel Energy Solutions (2011)
the main barriers for implementing such solutions are concerns about the costs of such
initiatives depending on the geographical location and the lack of awareness of many
hoteliers. In contrast, the reduction of operational costs, customer demand, the im-
provement of the hotels image and the wish to diminish the environmental damage are
the four most prominent drivers for more sustainable activities within the hospitality
industry (Hotel Energy Solutions, 2011).
As a result the application of sustainable building assessment tools is highly feasible in

the hospitality industry, as multiple goals can be achieved. Green hotel buildings pro-
vide built environments that provide guests good service and high comfort levels as well
33
as support the workers with ideal conditions for productivity. In addition such tools
work as a transparent communication tool of realized sustainability actions to guests.
Furthermore these certificates can still be used as unique selling propositions and can
work as a competitive advantage to attract not only conventional tourists but also guests
looking for sustainable tourism, which finally results in higher occupation and related
income (Schuetze, 2012).
As the analysis later focuses mainly on the first DGNB certified hotel in Austria and a
few other examples in Germany, an overview of the Austrian tourism industry is pro-
vided here.
The tourism industry plays a major role in the Austrian economy. Tourism satellite ac-
counts were implemented on the recommendation of EUROSTAT and the UNWTO in
order to better monitor the relationship between the tourism activities and the economy
in Austria. The high economic importance affects not only direct economic data like
GDP/capita but can be realized in the employment numbers as well. Consequently 7.3%
of Austrias workforce is employed in the tourism industry, which generates a percent-
age of 5.5 of direct value added to the whole GDP of Austria in 2011 (Statistik Austria,
Tourismus, 2013).
As the tourism industry is such a big one, all the tourism facilities contribute to the
overall emissions in Austria. In order to measure those trends the National Accounting
Matrix including Environmental Accounts was created. The aim of this matrix is to
measure the impacts of societal action on the environment. To find out how the tourism
industry in Austria contributes to the overall emissions, the Air Emissions Account was
taken into account. This measures all air emissions caused by private households, enter-
prises and institutions residing in Austria. According to these figures, enterprises work-
ing in the sectors Hotels and similar establishments" and "Restaurants and similar es-
tablishments accounted for 392,187 tons of CO2 emissions, corresponding to 0.562%
of the whole CO2 emissions in the Austrian economy. However it needs to be consid-
ered that this number represents just the direct emissions and does not include the indi-
rect emissions like passenger transportation or tourism connected products, culture, rec-
reation or other entertainment facilities. In addition these numbers only count for the
total CO2 emissions excluding other greenhouse gases like Sulphur dioxide (SO2), ni-
trogen oxides (NOx), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC), methane
34
(CH4), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxide (N2O), ammonia (NH3) as well as particu-
late matter (PM10 and PM2.5) (Statistik Austria, NAMEA, 2013).
35
3 METHODOLOGY
This chapter explains the methodology used to conduct the research. A mixed-methods
approach was used as the appropriate tool to analyze the evidence of the problem and
answer the research question. Through intensive in-depth research on the available liter-
ature and the analysis of the different certification schemes a conceptual framework as a
tool for the evaluation and observation of the empirical study was established. This is
described at a later stage. It lays the basis for the analysis in chapter 4 and includes an
analysis of the criteria catalogues. Two main drivers and the DGNB assessment tool
were analyzed to answer the research question. These drivers include the sustainable
construction industry, the government and the DGNB assessment criteria on the case of
hotel buildings.
3.1 Research instrument
A mixed methods approach is the appropriate tool to analyze the evidence of the prob-
lem and answer the research question. The mixed methods approach combines quantita-
tive and qualitative data in a single study in order to merge findings from different data
sources. The implementation can be done by the researcher either in collecting both the
quantitative and qualitative data sequentially in phases or they gather it concurrently.
When data is sequentially collected, either qualitative or quantitative data comes first.
For the following study a sequential exploratory strategy was used. This strategy was
conducted in two phases the initial phase of qualitative data collection and analysis.
This was done through a comprehensive research of articles and literature to analyze the
problem background and construct an analytical framework including quantitative data
collection. The next step was the collection of secondary quantitative data from a num-
ber of online databases and official reports in order to assist the interpretation of the
qualitative findings. This cross-validating of data and triangulation approach is general-
ly used to offset the weaknesses inherent within one method with the strengths of the
other method (Creswell, 2009).
With this type of analysis the priority of research is given to the qualitative aspect,
which makes it possible to create a conceptual framework based on background infor-
mation on the research problem.
36
In addition the sequential exploratory method makes it easy to straightforwardly and

easily explore and describe a phenomenon expanding on the qualitative findings such as
expert interviews, literature and data collected through official databases of national and
international organizations (Creswell, 2009).
3.1.1 Qualitative data
The first step of the study was a broad research of the literature and a short description
of the DGNB criteria in general. The aim of this step was to gain a holistic understand-
ing of the concept of green building and sustainable construction and the different certi-
fication schemes. Due to the topicality of the subject it was aimed to include the most
recent and complimentary literature.
The material used covered the topics of sustainable construction, green buildings, sus-
tainable building development, green building initiatives the history of sustainable certi-
fication schemes and energy policies in the EU and Austria, and the factors affecting the
implementation of sustainable certification schemes in order to become familiar with
the basic concepts.
Interviews
In order to fill the gaps in the literature and collect additional information from experi-
enced experts on the topic and the developed research findings and recommendations,
interviews were considered as a useful tool. For the selection of experts it was very im-
portant to choose people from different backgrounds including architects, auditors of
DGNB and operators of the certified hotel projects in Austria and Germany. This care-
ful selection should avoid a negative influence on the results of the study. With the help
of the interviews the personal experience with the DGNB certification scheme and their
personal ideas about improvements of the scheme according to hotel buildings was add-
ed to the analysis. In addition the conceptual framework was tested based on their per-
ception of the implementation of sustainable certification schemes on hotel buildings.
The author used structured interviews, as this type of interviews provides the same or-
der in which the questions are asked and the same wording of the questions from one
interview to another. The interviews were conducted either face-to-face, or electronical-
ly via e-mail discussions (Silvermann, 2010). The questions were open-ended questions.
37
Nine experts on green building certification from different organizations were contact-
ed. These include:
MMAg. Philipp Kaufmann MMAS: Philipp Kaufmann is real-estate trustee, en-
trepreneur and expert in Linz and at the Research Institute for Spatial and Real
Estate Economics, WU Vienna. After years in working in the real estate indus-
try, he became research assistant at the newly founded Institute for Spatial and
Real Estate Economics, WU Vienna in 2007. Additionally Philipp Kaufmann is
provincial office manager of the VI Upper Austria, board member of the FGW
and a member of ULI Austria. In 2009 he co-founded with the 124 initiators the
Austrian Society for Sustainable Real Estate (GNI). Since 29.09.2009 he is the
founding president.
Dipl. Ing. (FH) Thomas Gratzer: Dipl. Ing. Thomas Gratzer is project manager
at Michaeler & Partner, a company specialized in the consulting, development
and realization of projects in the international tourism industry. In addition he
was responsible for the certification of the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leon-
felden and is one of the GNI auditors.
Dir. Walter Breg: Dir. Walter Breg is the General Manager of the Falkensteiner
Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden. He worked for Sheraton and Hilton and many
other Austrian and German hotels and manages since October 2008 the first
DGNB certified Hotel building in Austria.
Mag. Arch. Gabriel Kacerovsky: Mag. Arch. Gabriel Kacerovsky is founder of
the architecture company archisphere which specializes in corporate architec-
ture, especially hotel architecture and medical offices, industry buildings and of-
fices for freelancers. He was also responsible for the design and planning of the
Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden.
Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Rhle: Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Rhle is a civil engineer and works
for Intep in Munich since 1998. His work focuses on sustainability concepts,
construction and material ecology, life cycle assessment, building physics,
building climatology and sustainability certifications. Since 2008, he accompa-
nied the development of the German sustainable building label (DGNB) and is
since 2009 an auditor and member of the Certification Committee and the Ex-
pert Group "construction and pollutants" of the DGNB (German Society for Sus-
38
tainable Building). This interview is based on another interview, which was

conducted earlier and published in WEKA Praxischeck (Hlousek, 2012).
Dipl. Ing. Sven Wnschmann MSc: Dipl. Ing. Sven Wnschmann is a specialist
on architecture and environment and is the area manager of CSD engineers for
Berlin and Stuttgart. CSD offers consultancy services and develops cost-
efficient solutions to improve quality of life and the environment. These activi-
ties encompass the fields of construction, environment and natural resources. He
is auditor of the DGNB and was responsible for the Etap Hotel Kln Messe and
the Ibis Budget hotel, but is also expert for the certification of many other build-
ing typologies.
Dipl. Ing. Slawomira Bukowska: Dipl. Ing. Slawomira Bukowska is a project
development expert at Porr Solutions Immobilien- und Infrastrukturprojekte
GmbH. Additionally she acts as an auditor for GNI and DGNB and is an ex-
pert on the certification of office buildings as well as Hotel buildings. Therefore
she was responsible for the certification of the Hotel & Office Campus Berlin
and the Hotel Steigenberger am Kanzleramt.
Dipl. Ing. Yvonne Brandenburger MSc.: Dipl. Ing. Yvonne Brandenburger is an
expert on the certification of DGNB for hotel buildings and other building ty-
pologies and works for IQ real estate GmbH. This company has focused for
many years on the development, planning and implementation of real estate pro-
jects with quality. As DGNB auditor she was, among other projects, also respon-
sible for the certification of the Hafenspitze Dsseldorf.
Angelika Bandke: Angelika Bandke works for the DGNB academy in Germany,
which is the DGNBs educational and training center. It provides basic and spe-
cialized knowledge in the sustainable construction sector.
The interviews were conducted as semi-structured interviews based on an interview

guide to gather information about the general opinion of sustainable building certifica-
tions and then the special cases of hotel buildings. The interview guideline was estab-
lished before as an orientation for the interviewer. The questions were asked open-
ended in order to allow room for the specific, personal views of the interviewees and
also avoid influencing them. The expert interviews were chosen in order to retrieve
their specific expertise on the field of sustainable building certification especially the
case of the DGNB certification for hotel buildings (Flick, 2011).
39
After the review of the interviews and the literature, all data was analyzed. This analysis
was supported by the use of quantitative primary and secondary data, in order to be able
to answer the research question.
3.1.2 Secondary Data
The following official documents and databases were used in order to gather further
data to support the findings of the qualitative analysis:
The comparison of the evaluation indicators is based on the profile library of the Austri-
an Sustainability Building Council (GNI).
In order to compare the findings of the expert interviews and the literature, which were
cross-checked with a report from McGraw Hill Construction (2013) on world green
building trends. This should help to show if the findings are supported and follow a
common trend within the worldwide green building industry.
3.2 Conceptual Framework
The basis for the conceptual framework were the arguments and concepts found in the
literature, which help to answer the research question, what kinds of obstacles in apply-
ing the DGNB certification scheme on hotel buildings are evident and how can they be
overcome?
In this framework, two main drivers for green building certification and assessment
have been identified: the market, including both demand and supply side, and the gov-
ernments as legal bodies. It can be assumed however that the major input comes from
the market, as the creation of several Green Building Councils also shows. For many
building typologies the market already has recognized the additional value of green
building activities, and its demand of the end-user. These drivers together with incen-
tives and regulations from the governments are addressing future green building activi-
ties; however they are very specific according to the region and the building type.
40
FIGURE 4: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In the case of hotel buildings, a diverse user group can be detected. Allthough the opera-
tors would be the tenants, the guests as end-users also play a relevant role. As they are
often changing, all the responsibilities for maintenance are given back to the operators.
However the guests play a major role regarding the demand for these assessment tools.
Many of them already wish to feel that their actions are environmentally responsible, so
a stay in a hotel, which ensures hospitality both to the guests and the environment. Rel-
evant drivers and triggers derived from the three market attendees, the governments and
the barriers towards green building certification will be determined in the analysis and
linked in a comprehensive manner to the concept of green building assessment and cer-
tification.
41
4 ANALYSIS
This chapter will analyze how the different drivers from the conceptual framework may
contribute to the further development of green building certification. The first part will
explore the differences between the certification criteria. Here the difference in building
types and how each indicator is evaluated and calculated will be analyzed to see if the
prerequisites for the hotel building are met. The second part of the chapter will concen-
trate on the recent performance of the DGNB certificate on hotel buildings. The collect-
ed and analyzed data from all the interviews will be compared with each other. The in-
formation will be split up in important key areas, interest and market value, acceptance
within the hotel sector and design and construction costs. As most of the key areas are
closely connected, arguments and topics repetitions occurred in regards to the content.
In addition it will strongly focus on the pioneer project of Austria, the Falkensteiner
Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden.
4.1 DGNB criteria analysis1
In this part the DGNB criteria for hotel buildings will be analyzed in detail. The author
will compare the criteria for hotel buildings with the ones for office buildings, which
have been the basis for the creation of the hotel building certification. It will be argued
that the specific building and operation characteristics of hotel buildings require special
attributes, which differ from the ones of office buildings. In addition it will describe the
differences by having a look at each of the criteria profiles of GNI and relevant arti-
cles.
4.1.1 Building types

Office and administration buildings are all buildings which are mainly used for
office and administrative activities.
Hotel buildings are all buildings that offer central services of a hotel. These are:
Lodgement / reception: with reception, housekeeping and reservations
1
Chapter 4.1 and all subchapters of 4.1 are based on the DGNB assessment criteria profiles 201 1 for
Austria, provided by the GNI (GNI, 2011).
42
Catering services (F & B): kitchen, restaurant, bar, room service and banquet
service
Logistics: Purchasing office, goods inspection, warehousing
Administration: management, accounting, controlling, sales and marketing,
human resources and maintenance
Additional services: telephone/fax, internet access, TV, laundry service, fit-
ness and spa services, rental of meeting rooms, entertainment programs
It is differentiated between spa and wellness hotels, holiday and sport hotels, as well as
business, convention and conference hotels.
When it comes to the location of the hotel it is distinguished between three categories:
Country Hotel in rural areas
City hotel in urban areas
Hotel at an infrastructure hub, like an airport or railway station.
A special form is the resort, which is not considered in the certification. Usually the
certification considers the classical star category classification according to the Austrian
Professional Hotel Association.
4.1.2 Austrian DGNB criteria assessment
As already mentioned above the DGNB certification is done with the help of more than
60 criteria divided into the six key aspects of sustainable building: environmental, eco-
nomic, sociocultural and functional aspects, technical quality, process quality and site
quality. For the evaluation of office buildings and hotel buildings 49 indicators are used.
The evaluation of the building is done in three steps:
Determining the degree of fulfillment of the individual criteria taking into ac-
count the importance factor
Determining the degree of fulfillment of each of the main groups of criteria
(qualities)
Determining the overall performance level (certification level) taking into ac-
count the weighting of the main groups of criteria.
43
The individual criteria are described in profiles, which contain, in addition to general
information, also information on the assessment methodology, the assessment scale, and
norms. Three different assessment classifications are used:
Qualitative, through a checklist rating
Quantitative, through the fulfillment of certain computable ratings
Or both, qualitative and quantitative through meeting the computable targets
combined with a checklist rating.
Assessment classes
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Qualitative Quantitative Combination
Office Buildings 26 14 8
Hotel Buildings 26 15 7
FIGURE 5: ASSESSMENT CLASSIFICATION
As figure 5 shows, the two versions for office and hotel buildings show mainly the same
amount of indicators in each class. The hotel buildings version shows one quantitative
indicator more, whereas the office building version includes one combined indicator
more.
4.1.3 Austrian DGNB criteria: Hotel buildings vs. Office buildings
In the following subchapters the Austrian DGNB criteria will be explained in detail. In
addition the differences between the two versions will be pointed out and the assess-
ment tools will be evaluated. Basically, 23 criteria of the 49 criteria used in both ver-
sions are analogously assessed. The office building version includes one more criterion
in the environmental quality aspect group, whereas the hotel building version addition-
ally evaluates the family-friendliness of the building.
44
4.1.3.1 Environmental quality aspect
The environmental quality aspect consists of 12 criteria summarized in six main topics.
These criteria refer to the effects on the local and global environment and focus on the
resource use and waste generation of a building.
The first criteria group is the lifecycle assessment including global warming potential
(the potential contribution of a substance to the warming of the surface air, the so-
called greenhouse effect), ozone depleting potential (level of destroying the ozone layer,
which is responsible for protecting the earths surface from UV radiation and excessive
heat), photochemical ozone creation potential (potential for formation of ground-level
ozone through harmful gases, such as Nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons together with
UV radiation), acidification potential (potential of acid rain through an increased con-
centration of sulfuric and nitric acid in the air) and eutrophication potential (transition
potential of water and soil from a nutrient-poor in a nutrient-rich condition through
supply of phosphor or nitrogen) (Makkie, 2010).
The assessments of these five criteria are done at the end of construction and evaluate
the manufacture, use and disposal of the building over the entire life-cycle in accord-
ance with NORM EN ISO 14040 and 14044.
The next criterion in this category is the local environmental impact. The objective is to
reduce or avoid building materials which are risk factors for the groundwater, surface
water, soil and air during use, transportation and construction on the site. This criterion
is measured during the whole construction process.
The third criterion is the environmentally friendly material production. The aim of this
criterion is the exclusion of timber and timber products from uncontrolled mining in
endangered tropical, sub-tropical and boreal forest regions of the world. They are only
allowed to be used if the products are certified by the Forest Stewardship Council
(FSC).
Fourthly the primary energy demand is assessed. Here the average yearly amount of
non-renewable primary energy over the life cycle of construction, operation and dispos-
al of the building is used as a benchmark. Also the percentage of renewable energy is
considered in this calculation.
45
The next assessment point is the drinking water demand and wastewater volume. The
basis for this assessment are preconditions, which are created in the planning phase and
contribute to the water usage independent from the user behavior. The value necessary
can then be determined by the users behavior and the handling of grey water and rain-
water.
The last point of the environmental quality assessment is the land use. Here it is as-
sessed whether and to what extent the type of land used by the construction project
changes. The project can be assessed positively if no area has to be additionally con-
verted.
The majority of the criteria in this group are evaluated via quantitative methods. These
include comprehensive calculation methods and the use of additional software including
reference values from the Austrian Standards Institute. The differences between the two
versions are in the limits for criteria 1-5, 10 and 11. The hotel buildings version shows
higher limits than the one for office buildings. Regarding the drinking water demand
and the wastewater volume, the specifications for hotel buildings are considered, like
the average number of guests, the hotel stars, the net floor area or planted surfaces.
Specifications like the spa-area are classified separately.
4.1.3.2 Economic quality aspect
The economic quality aspect includes just two criteria. These criteria refer to the life
cycle costs from the beginning (construction of a building) to the end (demolition of the
building), the process chain and show the suitability of a building for third party use.
In the first criterion, the life cycle costs including the construction costs and the ex-
pected service costs that have a direct connection with the building are assessed. Until
now, the conventional planning and construction process focused mainly on minimizing
the construction costs of a building. In order to get a more economically sustainable
building the minimization of the life cycle costs of buildings and the relative cost reduc-
tion of remodeling and maintenance investments compared to the new building are as-
sessed.
46
The second criterion measures the level of adaptability of buildings under low resource
use and consumption of the main supporting structure. The lower the costs for adapta-
bility are the higher the suitability for third party use.
In this criterion group the evaluation is based on one quantitative and one qualitative
method. The second criterion is assessed with the support of a checklist. The first one is
again based on the norms of the Austrian Standards Institutes. The main difference is
the consideration of the hotel category, as the life-cycle costs are raising with the hotel
category. Besides some special categories are considered, including spa-areas, confer-
ence facilities, or restaurants. With the help of the comparative values these criterion
can be assessed and checked easily.
4.1.3.3 Socio-cultural and functional quality aspect
The socio-cultural and functional quality aspect consists of 15 criteria, which represents
the quality aspect with the highest number of criteria. These criteria refer to the user
convenience and examine the functional and design characteristics of buildings.
The first two assess the thermal comfort in summer and winter. Therefore a checklist
including the operating temperature, draught, radiant temperature asymmetry, floor
temperature, relative humidity and vertical temperature gradient was created and will
bring a final result. Besides 80% of the rooms need to meet the requirement of living
according to NORM 15251.
For the assessment of the next criterion, the indoor air quality, again a checklist was
created. This measures the indoor hygiene with the help volatile organic compounds:
the perceived air quality, the microbiological situation and the personal ventilation rate.
This is done in the planning phase and after the final completion of the project.
The aim of the fourth criterion, the acoustic comfort, is to ensure a proper room acoustic
quality according to the respective use of the rooms. The room acoustic quality deter-
mines the acoustic comfort and has a significant impact on the performance in the
workplace. The evaluation for this criterion is based on the NORM 8115-3.
The assessment of the fifth criterion, the visual comfort, is based on the visual connec-
tion to the outside, glare, daylight availability, light distribution and color rendering.
47
Basis for this evaluation are the DIN 5034 Part 1-3: Daylight in interiors and the
NORM 12464 Part 1: Lighting of work places.
The next assessment criterion is called user influence on the building operation and in-
cludes ventilation, sunscreen, temperatures during the heating season, temperatures out-
side the heating season, the control of daylight and artificial light and the ease of use of
the rooms.
The quality of outdoor spaces is the seventh criterion and assesses the creative planning
of technical constructions, roofs, courtyards, atriums and open spaces in the facade like
balconies.
Another aspect of the socio-cultural and functional quality is safety and security. These
include clearly laid out paths, illumination of paths, routes to security-enhanced park-
ing, evacuation plans, technical safety devices, gas fire risk, escape routes and operating
instructions. The evaluation of those aspects is based on several NORMs.
The ninth criterion is handicapped accessibility and is completely based on Austrian

norms for the Austrian construction sector and on the norms for accessible tourism fa-
cilities established by the Austrian Chamber of Commerce.
The efficient use of floor area is based on the proportion of effective area on gross floor
area and is calculated by interpolation between the key values. The higher the amount of
effective area, the higher is the result of the assessment.
Another point of this quality area is the suitability for conversion and consists of three
main criteria: the modularity of the building, the electrical and utility supply and the
heating, the water supply and sanitation. The less effort it is to convert the building, the
better its capacity to judge a high suitability for adapting the building to another type.
The next criterion, the public access, again uses a checklist for the assessment. This
varies with building types and, in the case of hotel buildings contains the opening of the
outdoor facilities to the public, the opening of building internal facilities such as cafete-
rias, restaurants, swimming pools and gyms to the public, the possibility of renting
space within the building by third parties next to the hotel rooms and the diversity of
use of the public and depends on number of hotel rooms. The main aim of this criterion
is to increase the acceptance of the building in the neighborhood and community and
48
the integration of the building into the existing urban space, which is eased by the pub-
lic and mixed use of the building.
Another point in the assessment is the cycling convenience. It evaluates the establish-
ment of a bicycle infrastructure including the location and distance of the parking to the
entrance of the building, corresponding service levels which offer staff and guests to
bring their own bicycle and allows the switch to a more environmentally friendly way to
work, for example showers, changing rooms and drying facilities for bicycle clothes.
The fourteenth criterion is design and urban planning quality through competition. It
includes the implementation of planning competitions, the competition proceedings, the
execution of an award-winning design and the commissioning of the planning team or
an architectural award. These competitions allow the clients to find the appropriate con-
tractor in a clearly structured and transparent manner.
The last criterion of the socio-cultural quality aspect is the integration of public art. This
criterion should be used to establish a direct relationship between the public, the build-
ing and its use. They should each have a special place- and object-reference and help to
strengthen the acceptance and the identification of users with the building, to attract
attention and to give locations a unique profile. In this criterion, art and architecture
refers to the building or the plot, paintings for guest rooms and corridors are not meant.
The majority of these criterions are based on a qualitative or the combination of qualita-
tive and quantitative methods, so they are evaluated with the help of comprehensive
checklists. In addition these criteria focus on the comfort and functionality of the build-
ing, which requires the consideration of the building specifications of hotel buildings.
These include for example the temperature in hotel rooms, the room layout (including
conference rooms, hotel rooms, restaurants, lobby, lounges, but also the offices), the
ceiling height, or the location of the hotel building. In addition the checklists were
adapted to the operation and usage of hotel buildings, thus they often include a higher
number of checklist items. Only five criteria are checked with the same procedures
within the two versions. Due to the increased use of checklists for this aspect an easy
and understandable evaluation of the criteria is possible, however some contain subjec-
tive assessments. Another difference to the office building is the criterion of family
friendliness, which is also based on a checklist.
49
4.1.3.4 Technical quality aspect
The aspect of technical quality consists of five criteria. These criteria refer to the quality
of the technical implementation. A set of criteria is still in development. The criteria
have influence on the ecological, economic and socio-cultural quality of the building.
The first criterion of the technical quality aspect is fire prevention. The aim of this crite-
rion is an increase in the quality of fire protection measures. The main cause of deaths
in fires in buildings is poisonous smoke. Therefore installations which go beyond the
basic fire protection requirements may be assessed as a positive performance.
The second criterion attends to the indoor acoustics and sound insulation. The goal is to
improve the sound insulation. Minimum requirements for sound insulation in buildings
are defined in DIN 4109, which does not necessarily exclude unreasonable harassments.
As a consequence additional investments in noise control in office buildings are avoid-
ing loss of concentration and maintaining confidentiality.
In order to minimize the energy demand for climate control of buildings the criterion of
building envelope quality is formulated. It should ensure high thermal comfort and
should avoid structural damage during construction.
The fourth criterion, the ease of cleaning and maintenance, addresses the high economic
and environmental impact of a building during its operation phase. Thus specific clean-
ing and maintenance processes and surfaces that can be cleaned easily which lower the
costs and secure the longest possible life are assessed.
The last criterion of this quality aspect covers the ease of dismantling and recycling.
The avoidance of environmentally harmful waste and the reduction of waste is generally
a key objective for sustainable construction. The aim of the ease of dismantling and
recycling is the prevention of waste, particularly the amount and harmfulness, as more
than 50% of the total waste are attributable to the construction sector in Austria. Due to
the comparatively high average life expectancy of structures and components of todays
installed materials, they only accrue in 50 or 100 years as demolition materials and po-
tential waste.
This criteria group consists of two quantitative and three qualitative criteria assess-
ments. In this group almost every criterion differs in the two versions due to the legal
50
requirements for hotel buildings including different norms. The two values of cleaning
and maintenance and dismantling and recycling are evaluated in the same way as office
buildings.
4.1.3.5 Process quality aspect
The process quality aspect consists of eight criteria which refer to the quality of the
planning and construction phase of the building and are backed up by detailed docu-
mentation. A set of criteria is still in development. These criteria again have influence
on the ecological, economic and socio-cultural quality of the building.
The first criterion in this criteria group is the comprehensive project definition. This
should include demand planning, goal-setting discussions, goal setting itself, the prepa-
ration of an architectural competition and the influence of the use-related energy ex-
penditure.
The next one refers to the integrated planning. The aim of this criterion is to improve
the quality of planning and to optimize the planning process in order to ensure the reali-
zation of sustainable buildings. This can be reached through an improved coordination
of all parties involved over the entire life-cycle of the building. In order to reduce ener-
gy and resource consumption and increase comfort and efficiency at the same time, an
interdisciplinary planning team develops together with the client a holistic approach in
terms of sustainability oriented strategy.
The third criterion addresses the issue of comprehensive building design. This includes
the creation of a safety and health plan, the creation of an energy concept, the creation
of a water concept, the creation of a waste concept, the creation of a measurement con-
cept that supports the convertibility, deconstruction and recycling friendliness, the es-
tablishment of a management concept, the examination of the documents by third par-
ties and the implementation of variant comparisons.
In order to create a high-quality construction process, which fulfills all the product and
technology requirements for the achievement of all sustainability goals, the criterion of
sustainable aspects in the tender phase is added to this list.
Another aspect in the process quality is the documentation for facility management.
This includes the creation of a building pass to establish more market transparency, the
51
creation of building-related maintenance, inspection and operations instructions. In ad-

dition, it requires the detailed design and planning documents and calculations and the
creation of a user manual.
The sixth criterion covers the environmental impact of the construction site and process.
This assessment includes a low amount of waste, low noise, the environmental protec-
tion of soil and groundwater and dust-arm handling and processing of materials on the
construction site.
The next criterion addresses the construction quality assurance and quality control
measures. In this criterion the expertise and quality of the contractors are described and
assessed. A very important aspect is the prequalification of the company. Besides the
documentation of materials, auxiliary method and material safety data sheets are essen-
tial for the assessment.
The last criterion of the process quality is the systematic commissioning. This criterion
contributes significantly to long-term and efficient use of the building. Here the individ-
ual components of the technical building system are adjusted and the readjustment after
10-14 months is specified in a contract.
The process quality aspect just includes qualitative assessments. The whole process of
building a hotel is equally evaluated as the one of the office buildings. So the criteria
described do not show any differences with the other version. The only thing that is
adapted is the inclusion of a manual for the hotel guests in the documentation criterion.
Due to the use of checklists, the assessment is easily executable, however for the modi-
fication of existing buildings, the assessment can be difficult, if the planning documents
are not or only partly available.
4.1.3.6 Site quality aspect
The site quality aspect consists of seven criteria, which evaluate the micro-conditions
and macro- conditions of the site. The assessment of these criteria is not added to the
overall rating of the building and is mentioned separately.
The first criterion assesses the site location risks, such as threats of terrorism or natural
risks. It also concentrates on unpredictable human-induced disasters and risks from na-
ture or weather.
52
The next criterion addresses the site location conditions, like air quality, ambient noise
level, soil conditions, soil pollution, electromagnetic fields and presence of radon.
Another aspect of the site quality is the public image and social conditions. This in-
cludes the image and attractiveness of the location, the crime rates in the area and the
conservation status of the district.
What is also very important for the site quality is the access to transportation. Desirable
qualities for this criterion are the connection to public transport and consequently the
reduction of transportation.
The fifth criterion is the access to use-specific facilities, which should include food and
beverage facilities, local grocers shops, public administration, health care and sports
and leisure facilities.
Part of the site quality is also connections to utilities, which includes the access to con-
ducted energy, solar energy, broadband connection and the opportunity for infiltration
of rainwater.
In the last criteria group again only qualitative methods with the help of checklists are
used for the assessment of the building. Five of the seven criteria in the hotel building
version do not differ from the one of office buildings. In the criterion of access to trans-
portation the location of the hotel building is considered, which is essential especially
with hotels in urban areas. Also the access to use-specific facilities is suited to hotel
buildings, as they are often looking for different facilities than office users.
4.1.4 Adaptation of the system
The special requirements of hotel buildings, that have been mentioned in the literature
as well, have to be taken into account for the assessment criteria of the DGNB system.
Therefore it was very important that the comfort of the hotel guest is paid special atten-
tion, as this is the major concern of the hotel guest when staying in the hotel. Also the
star category and the occupancy type need special consideration. The accessibility is-
sues for urban hotels differ from those for remote country hotels and should therefore be
therefore considered in the evaluation. Another crucial aspect with hotel buildings are
operating and maintenance costs, as occupancy of a hotel room differs completely from
53
those of an office building or a residential building, although it is more similar to the

latter.
The system tries to consider these special requirements in all of the criteria profiles.
This was also mentioned in all of the interviews. Basically the certification process and
the criteria do not significantly differ from each other. They were adapted specifically to
the building requirements. GBCM 1 described the adaptation process in much detail.
The basis for each adaptation was the DGNB certification scheme for new office build-
ings in Germany. All alterations regarding building typology and country-specific re-
quirements were then performed with the help of parallelogram.
FIGURE 6: THE ADAPTATION PROCESS
Figure 6 shows the exact adaptation process as described by GBCM 1. He argues that
the first step was to take the certification criteria profiles for new office buildings and
adapt it to the Austrian standards and requirements for a sustainable building. Then the
DGNB in Germany designed a version for hotel buildings. The main aim for GNI and
the Austrian DGNB certificate is to understand all the adaptations from the office build-
ings version to the hotel buildings version and as a result to consider the local require-
ments and norms of the Austrian market. Besides he stressed that in the Austrian ver-
sion for hotel buildings the problems which occurred in the German market will be al-
ready considered in the Austrian version.
These adaptations can be noticed in the descriptions above, where several changes were
pointed out. However what was mentioned in every interview were the different needs
of the target groups for the certification. Here GM 1 mentioned that the quality of the
building itself contributes significantly to the economic success of the hotel building.
54
4.2 DGNB certification of hotel buildings
As reviewed in the literature, green building activities are driven by many different fac-
tors and views. According to the report of McGraw Hill Construction (2013) a green
building is seen as business opportunity. Client demand and market demand were stated
as the dominant drivers in the market. However these two factors can be noticed within
the whole market and also on the supply side.
Both demand and supply side become more concerned and increase their knowledge
about the environmental, social and economic aspects of green buildings. All of the
stakeholders: developers, constructors, clients, operators, tenant or guests profit from
the development of more green building activities in the market. Another report by the
World Green Building Council (2013) tries to point out the benefits for each of the
stakeholders very clearly. It mainly summarizes the key findings into the asset value,
design and construction costs, operating costs, workplace productivity and health and
risk mitigation. These five key areas include benefits and costs for all of the stakehold-
ers. These can also be recognized with all certification schemes of green buildings inde-
pendently from the building typology and the location of the building. Therefore figure
7 below shows the different stakeholder perceptions of the value of green buildings in
general. It clearly presents the benefits and costs for each stakeholder group, in this case
developer, tenant and owner. In addition it points out the benefits that the groups are
sharing amongst each other. Furthermore it describes very well the market structure of
the construction industry, with its different linkages and conjunctions.
55
FIGURE 7: STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTIONS (WORLD GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL, THE BUSINESS CASE FOR
GREEN BUILDING, 2013)
As the market structure is seen in the literature as the main driver for green building
development and as a result for the development of certification schemes within this
field, this figure is very helpful for further analysis of the findings of the different inter-
views. Besides it supports the derivation of the aspects on the hotel building market.
The single attributes will now be discussed further with the interpretation and compari-
son of all the analyzed data from the expert interviews. It is again split up into the im-
portant key areas interest and market value, acceptance within the hotel sector and de-
sign and construction costs of the DGNB certification of hotel buildings. The findings
for the special case of the pioneer project in Austria, the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad
Leonfelden, will be compared with the findings and opinions of the experts for the
German market. As most of the key areas are closely connected, arguments and topics
56
repetitions occurred in regards to the content. The first part of the chapter will include a
short description of the Falkensteiner group and the Falkensteiner Hotel and Spa Bad
Leonfelden.
4.2.1 Falkensteiner Hotel and Spa Bad Leonfelden
The Falkensteiner Hotel and Spa Bad Leonfelden is part of the Falkensteiner Michaeler
Tourism Group. This is a family-run company and offers its tourism products and ser-
vices in Central Europe. These include all areas of tourism development, from planning
to construction of hotels to the operational management and marketing activities for
their projects. At the moment the main business division is hotel management. They
operate 31 hotels and residences in six European countries under the name Falken-
steiner Hotels and Residences ( FMTG - Falkensteiner Michaeler Tourism Group AG,
2010).
tradition & innovation
people at the center & dynamic company
family-run & goal oriented
sustainable & bold
FIGURE 8: VALUES OF FALKENSTEINER MICHAELER TORUISM GROUP (TRANSLATED IN ENGLISH) ( FMTG -

FALKENSTEINER MICHAELER TOURISM GROUP AG, 2010)
Figure 8 shows the main values and aims of the Falkensteiner Michaeler Tourism
Group. As a family-run company they try to integrate traditions into modern innovation
with a focus on business results and sustainability. One of their main aims is to become
one of the most successful providers of complete tourism solutions in the long term (
FMTG - Falkensteiner Michaeler Tourism Group AG, 2010).
57
As the tourism industry is strongly focusing on people, this aspect is also part of the
companys values. There a strong relationship can be seen to the sustainability model,
as it also considers the social aspects and the DGNB certificate also concentrates on the
comfort and the well-being of the users. This also includes their next value, the familiar-
ity and the attention to the results. This is met by being still a family-run company.
Their last value concentrates completely on the sustainability issue. They describe this
value as We develop bold ideas and always take the sustainability of our decisions into
consideration when implementing them ( FMTG - Falkensteiner Michaeler Tourism
Group AG, 2010). They have also shown this with the development of the Falkensteiner
Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden, which was the first DGNB certified hotel in Austria and
also played a major role in the adaptation of the DGNB certification criteria profiles.
The Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Leonfelden is a four star property in the region
Mhlviertel in Upper Austria. It is located in a natural setting on a hill at the edge of
Bad Leonfelden. In addition to the classical features of the Falkensteiner Hotel group,
like their Acquapura SPA program or their special culinary program called Alpe-Adria
Kulinarik, this property focuses strongly on regional aspects throughout the whole op-
eration. It tries to integrate itself into the regional conditions of the area as good as pos-
sible, both in operation and the construction of the building. The region of the
Mhlviertel is one of the leading regions when it comes to sustainability. It has a strong
focus on organic agriculture, renewable energy production and regional business cycles.
The certification of the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden fits well to the re-
gional focus and is seen as another important step for the region to further support a
sustainable development (Falkensteiner Hotels & Residences, 2013).
4.2.2 Interest and Market value
Within the office building industry the interest and market value for certified buildings
is already on a very good track. With this building typology the developer/investor al-
ready has the interest to increase the market value and therefore sales chances for his
building. This is secured through a higher demand from the tenants perspective al-
ready, to decrease on the one hand their operation and maintenance costs, but also on
the other hand through increased productivity and the health and well-being of the user.
In addition is the certification especially demanded by potential investors, who are in-
58
terested in the maintained value of the building when it is resold (World Green Building
Council, The Business Case for Green Building, 2013).
However hotel buildings have special industry requirements and therefore need a spe-
cial consideration. This argument is confirmed by all experts. The target group for the
hotel certification is diversely pointed out. PM 2 argues that the hotel guest is primarily
targeted instead of the classical investor or constructor. PM 4 and PM 5 on the other
hand point out that due to the common management contracts the operators or the own-
ers are the main target group for the hotel building certification. As a result this would
of course also influence the developer or investor of the building which want to rent out
their buildings. Still the pressure from the different hotel managers on the developer is
not high enough that a potential interest can be realized in the end. As also reviewed in
the literature, PM 5 points out that the interest of hotel managers is often in other areas
than the hotel building itself. However especially chain affiliated hotels show an in-
creased interest in building certifications, which is appreciated. According to the opin-
ion of PM 5 and 4 this can often be tracked back to corporate environmental policies
and action plans. The demonstration of their environmental and social commitment and
achievements is used to maintain a good brand image. Those can also have influence on
the corporate identity of the brand and as a result to the guest information. They also
stress that the major hotel chains have already increased interest in the certification of
newly constructed buildings; however the used certification is often dependent on the
corporate environmental policies and on the common market conditions. Although
DGNB would be commonly used in Austria and Germany, a lot of international hotel
chains would stick to the major certification schemes like LEED. Reasons for this
would be that they are already used to the requirements of these certification schemes as
they are commonly used in their markets of origin.
GBCM 1 argues that in the special case of hotel buildings the building itself is not the
only driver for sustainability. He claims that the basis is established through the con-
structional measures complemented with the operation of the hotel. From his point of
view the demand of sustainable certification of hotel buildings is increasing and present
at the market. With the help of a sustainable construction of hotel buildings he says that
the user friendliness and the user guidance can be driven towards a more sustainable
one in the long run. He still argues that both the operation and the building itself strong-
59
ly interrelate with each other. It is therefore also important to inform the guests about
the implemented features in order to reach the optimal result for a sustainable hotel
building. As a result in his opinion it is necessary that the hotel building itself meets
certain conditions as hardware and the guest is guided to and understands the aims that
want to be met with a sustainable hotel building. In addition he argues that in compari-
son it is much easier with office buildings, as a fixed workforce is using the building,
who also knows how to use all the features properly under the guidance of a facility
manager, who is in the worst case also able to come up with punitive measures.
Having a look at the specific case, the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden, one
interviewed person (PM 1) more represents the view of the developer and investor,
whereas GM 1 completely focuses on the operation of the hotel building. PM 1 argues
that the interest for sustainable building certification increased generally within the
market independently on the system, the location and the building typology. For the
specific example of the DGNB certification in Austria he stated that the Falkensteiner
Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden is the pilot project for Austria. It tries to create bench-
marks for the sustainable use and construction of a hotel building, which can in the end
be used from both the operator and the developer. For the operator he sees the main
benefit in the reduction of operating and maintenance costs, for the developer the in-
creased asset value and quality of the building. In addition he argues that the certifica-
tion also helps to reduce the increased effort in the due diligence, which is a review of
the building systems and features that can affect the operation and value of a property.
Furthermore he argues that with a certified building the investor can be sure that all the
construction related norms and guidelines have been met. As a result he claims that the
investor therefore decreases the possible risks of the future value of the real estate asset
and the return of investment or the rental income. He states the hotel guest, as the end-
user of the building, will only perceive the features of a sustainable building uncon-
sciously through a good indoor quality, better lighting or better ventilation.
GM 1 on the other hand mainly looks at the interest for sustainable certification of hotel
buildings from the operators point of view. He argues that compared to the U.S. market
the European one is less dependent on certifications when it comes to hotel bookings.
Whereas the companies in the U.S. market are more focused on the brand image, the
reason for the certification in Europe lies more in the attitude of every hotelier towards a
60
more sustainable and careful use of resources. For the case of the Falkensteiner Hotel &
Spa Bad Leonfelden he says that it was their intention from the beginning, starting at
the designing and planning phase, to deal responsibly with sustainable core-attributes
and their implementation. In this case these include:
The hardware including the hotel building construction and the equipment with
furniture from regional material
All the processes, including regional economic conditions.
The awareness building within the staff members, including the training within
their own Falkensteiner Academy.
4.2.3 Acceptance within the hotel sector
Similar to the interest and market value of the certification scheme, the market and con-
sumer demand are the main drivers for the acceptance of such a system. Whereas for the
office building market the use of certification schemes is already quite common and
demanded by the stakeholders due to the majority of benefits (World Green Building
Council, The Business Case for Green Building, 2013), it still lacks at the acceptance
within the hotel sector especially in Germany and Austria. Another point that leads to
this negative trend in acceptance is that often hotel managers and owners lack infor-
mation about the green building market or that especially the Austrian hotel market con-
sists mostly of SMEs instead of chain affiliated hotels.
GBCM 1 mentions here that the DGNB certification scheme needs a certain lead time
with each of the certification schemes. Usually the certification is first applied to a pio-
neer project, like it was in the case of the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden,
during the whole process from the development and planning phase to the final com-
missioning of the building. Then after about two to four years the certification scheme
becomes established on the market. Besides he mentions, as reviewed in the literature,
that the Austrian hotel market consists of many SMEs which are also often already
market leaders in specific regions over a long time. He points out that this is not neces-
sarily a disadvantage; however the additional value of extra sustainable efforts and even
a sustainable building certification is often not relevant because of their already well-
established name in the market. In comparison with the office building market the cli-
ents already demand the certification and also the sustainable construction of the build-
ing. Another important issue that he points out is that most of the chain-affiliated hotels
61
often use other certification schemes than the DGNB, which they have already used for
other properties in other regions. Here the LEED certification was mentioned as the
main certification tool. As a third main point he mentioned that the market in Austria
does not really offer a lot of new built hotel properties and therefore the certification is
not that relevant. Still he is of the opinion that the DGNB certification is accepted with-
in the industry, it just needs time to establish within the market. In his point of view in
Austria the system is on a good track, as already three main investors and development
companies of tourism projects are part of their network, namely the Falkensteiner
Michaeler Tourism Group, the SIGNA holding and the VAMED.
The arguments of GBCM 1 were confirmed by PM 5. In his opinion the industry con-
stellation of hotel buildings differs completely from the one of office buildings. If the
owner of the hotel building is at the same time the operator of the building, then the
decision whether a certification scheme like DGNB is applied or not is a corporate in-
ternal decision. If it is a management contract, like the majority of the chain-affiliated
hotels, the corporate identity of the hotel is priority in the decision for or against the
application of a sustainable building certification. Here it is of great importance then
that the standards and requirements are accordingly unified, which is also the reason for
most of the big chains to use other certification schemes like the LEED certification.
According to PM 4 there is a lack of acceptance of the project developers or builders

who do not offer the development of a new hotel building with the included certification
process of DGNB and additionally a lack of practical experience with the DGNB certi-
fication in the hotel building industry. The DGNB certification of hotel buildings is a
quite young certification method thus if a lack of knowledge and interest in a sustaina-
ble building certification exits then these schemes are rarely taken into account. Fur-
thermore the additional costs through a certification are often mentioned as barriers for
the certification.
However if the stakeholders like owners or developers and investors already had expe-
rience with a certification, they are often willing to apply a certification to future pro-
jects as well, as they already know how the certification process works and what has to
be considered.
62
PM 2 agrees with the arguments that the DGNB certification is still a very young certi-
fication scheme, however that the increasing number of certified hotel projects especial-
ly in Germany shows that the certification scheme increases in acceptance. He mentions
that especially for hotel chains, a repeated certification with the same scheme could in-
crease the interest, as the planning and preparation effort for the certification decreases
from one project to another. In his opinion the market demand, especially the one from
the guests side, is more difficult to assess. In his opinion this varies between the hotel
type and the location. A higher demand for more sustainable hotel buildings can be seen
in the resort markets or country hotels. The business and urban hotel market is more
driven by the sustainable corporate culture of the companies with high travel activities
of their employees. When they have incorporated the use of a sustainable certified hotel
building within their own corporate culture, a rising demand will be noticed within the
sustainable hotel building market. Concluding his opinion he thinks that the acceptance
of the sustainable building certification is expected to be primarily driven by the de-
mand from the user perspective.
Concentrating on the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden, GM 1 based his ar-
guments more on the booking behavior and their influence on the hotel operation as a
result. He argues that the certification process is often associated with a large financial
investment and that the benefits of the certification are not really recognizable especial-
ly not with increased bookings in the hotel. The guests decide primarily on special of-
fers, price and location. In his opinion environmental certifications do not have a really
direct influence on the booking behavior. However he mentions the lack of knowledge
of the hoteliers. Therefore for the future he recommends that the focus of these certifica-
tion schemes should be on the communication and increasing the awareness and the
representation of the benefits and high quality guaranteed by the certification. This
should raise more attention of the hoteliers but of course also of the guests for a sustain-
able and responsible use of the environment.
PM 1 agrees with the argument that the hotel industry constellation differs completely
from other building typologies. A hotel building is often operated longer without inter-
ruptions than the office building. Besides he argues that with a bad operation of a hotel
building the asset value decreases and the building itself suffers more from it. In addi-
tion, in his opinion it also lacks knowledge within the industry, especially in the Austri-
63
an and German market. Hotel buildings are often less new constructed and certified
within the Austrian market. In the international markets he thinks that this is different
and that there is more focus on certifications of newly constructed buildings. Further-
more he mentions that the DGNB certification is a very comprehensive system and re-
quires a lot of effort can also lead to additional costs. Therefore it often lacks on the
knowledge on how this certification can be judged by the industry.
4.2.4 Design and construction costs
According to the World Green Building Council, building green does not necessarily
means that higher costs arise, especially when environmental strategies, program man-
agement and cost strategies are already implemented into the development and design
phase. In addition additional costs for green buildings are often perceived higher by the
construction industry. (World Green Building Council, The Business Case for Green
Building, 2013)
This part analyzes the additional value of a DGNB certification for hotel buildings and
reports the progresses made especially in the case of the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad
Leonfelden.
The argument of the World Green Building Council is also confirmed by GBCM 2.
From his point of view, sustainable buildings are of higher value due to the reduction of
operating and maintenance costs. In his answer he refers to several studies, which point
out that sustainable buildings minimize risk of vacancies and can increase rental in-
come. As a result this leads to an increased market value and higher sales and resale
prices of the asset. He argues that sustainable buildings are therefore value drivers and
no cost factors. In addition he refers to a specific study conducted by the consulting
company Drees & Sommer: The financial overhead of a DGNB certification in con-
struction costs amounts between zero to four percent. The additional costs for planning
and advice are even below 0.5%.
PM 4 considers in his answer more the property, which can, from a long-term operators
point of view, better resist the developments of the sustainable building market. The
building process and the asymmetry of information between the investors and users or
operators becomes more transparent. This leads to new discussions and further ques-
tions, which can even increase the awareness about green buildings. In order to reach
64
certain targets for the certification, the whole process requires additional evidence from
an auditor. Therefore users know that an additional quality control was performed and
that the building can be better compared to other hotel properties. As a result this also
increases the market value of the hotel property.
PM 2 argues that many projects already follow very high standards from the develop-
ment stage. Therefore a certification would help to make the already achieved standards
more transparent and also demonstrate some suggestions for improvements. So he
claims that those developers and investors, who have already planned sustainably, are
expected to have lower costs in order to reach a certain certification standard for a hotel
building. In addition he states that both the hotel guest and the operator would signifi-
cantly profit from the DGNB certification. In order to reach a DGNB certification cer-
tain air measurements are required. Therefore the guest would benefit from better in-
door air quality. On the other hand the operator will profit through the documentation of
planning and constructing in a sustainable way, which also optimizes the operation in
the long run. Besides an additional benefit is expected for all stakeholders, as the market
and the comparability of real-estate projects will increase.
All of the arguments by PM 2 are confirmed by GBCM 1. He argues that through the
optimization in the investment the life cycle and the operational costs can be already
optimized. Through the structure of management contracts within the hospitality indus-
try, the developer or investor would also profit from lower maintenance and operating
costs. However he stresses that there is of course a difference between smaller private-
ly-owned hotels or chain-affiliated hotels. In the private sector the transparency in the
market is not that important. The private hotel sector does not consider a resale of the
building after a certain period of time and therefore it is, compared to the institutional
market, not necessary to demonstrate all the quality and performance measures to all
stakeholders. However in his opinion the acceptance of the certification is already very
high and the additional expenditure remunerates in the long run.
ARCH 1 agrees with the opinions of the other respondents and adds that in his point of
view a building certification for a hotel is an investment in the future. In addition it is an
independent validation for the investor that the building fulfills the latest trends in terms
of resource conservation issues, preserving value and user comfort.
65
Also in the case of the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden PM 1 emphasizes
that the return on investment happens faster in the long run. The operator and owner of
a highly-qualitative property can be sure that the life-cycle costs are reduced. Through
the certification the life-cycle costs become more transparent and the property therefore
more attractive. In the case of the Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Leonfelden he is sure that
the certification was worth it, as the building is now officially sustainable. Furthermore
the certification process has shown them the strengths and weaknesses of the building in
order to know where operating costs can be reduced. He also agrees with GBCM 1,
when it comes to the private hotel sector. Here he recommends smaller and easier certi-
fication schemes. Based on this he argues that the DGNB certification is a very compre-
hensive certification scheme, which might be not necessary for smaller enterprises and
properties but also not appropriate in this scope.
From an operators point of view the additional expenditure is seen more critically. GM
1 argues that it is important to consider also the often not very sustainable guest needs
in the certification of hotel buildings. The risk of negative guest reviews is much higher,
when the hotelier is concerned too much about sustainability. A good example would be
the towels in the spa area. Especially for higher class hotels it is expected that towels are
always available in the spa area. Therefore the effort to convince hotel guests of a more
responsible use of resources is much greater than among employees of an office build-
ing. At the moment in his opinion the cost is even higher compared to the value of certi-
fication. In addition the European market is still not ready to pass the financial costs of
the certification and the sustainable use of resources in the hotel onto the guest room
prices.
However for the Falkensteiner Group the integration of the hotels into the environment
and the region, both visually and in cooperation with regional partners was and is im-
portant. Especially for a hotel in the rural environment this is of greater significance
than for a city hotel.
The use of typical local and natural materials in terms of the environmental and eco-
nomic performance, combined with the careful use of all resources is for them just as
important as a high technical quality, representing the fire protection concept and the
related purpose safety.
66
The Falkensteiner Group has also paid attention to the socio-cultural quality and the
functionality of a high level of comfort for their guests. These include, among many
other factors, handicapped accessible rooms and an optimal thermal and visual setting.
4.2.5 Summary of findings
Table 2 summarizes all the findings from the expert interviews. It highlights the main
drivers and barriers for sustainable building certifications for hotel buildings.
Drivers for green building certifications Barriers for green building certifica-
in the hospitality industry tions in the hospitality industry
Lower operating and maintenance costs Diverse user groups
Solutions integrated in internal policy No recognizable consequences
Prior positive experience Hotel managers attitude towards the top-

ic/lack of market pressure
Higher asset value Market structure in Austria/many SMEs
More transparent information through cer- Lack of information for own-

tification ers/operators/guests
Higher acceptance through integration into Large time and personnel requirement for
the environment implementation, training and maintenance
Higher branding value Higher first cost
Higher building performance
TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
4.3 Document analysis
The literature review highlighted a number of triggers and barriers for green building
activity in the future. Similarly a report of the McGraw Hill Construction (2013) about
World Green Building trends compares findings from more than 800 architects, engi-
neers, owners, consultants, manufacturers and suppliers worldwide. This report was
done with the help of an online survey in more than 62 countries around the world. It is
the second edition after the first in 2008 and compares the findings between 2008 and
2012.
67
This subchapter tries to combine the findings from the qualitative data with the findings
of the report. The results of the interviews above and the literature reviewed were
cross-checked with the results of this worldwide report, in order to show if the findings
are supported and follow a common trend within the whole worldwide green building
industry. However the report includes sustainable building certification schemes for all
building typologies and does not explicitly focus on hotel buildings.
4.3.1 Triggers Driving Future Green Building Activity
As figure 9 describes, primary triggers for green building were market and client de-
mand. Similar findings were also shown in the interviews above in the section of inter-
est and market value. Especially lower operating costs and branding/ public relations
increased in their importance in 2012 compared to 2008. This was also mentioned by
the experts in the hospitality industry and reviewed in the literature. Especially in the
USA in the hospitality industry the issue of branding and public relations of green hos-
pitality buildings is very strong. There many hotel chains have already incorporated
green building activities in their internal policies. Also the high energy and resource
demand for hotel buildings and lower operating costs were mentioned by the interview-
ees. In addition many of the experts also mentioned the higher building value in the
long run, which is especially interesting for investors and owners. Furthermore the ar-
gument of Right Thing to do decreased immensely, which is in the authors point of
view the trend of companies to become aware of the benefits of green building in gen-
eral.
68
Triggers Driving Future Green Building Activity

2008 2012
42%
34%35% 35%33% 35%
30% 30%
26% 25%23%
22% 22%24%
17% 18% 16% 18%
13% 12%
9%11%
Client Demand
Market Demand
Lower Operating Costs
Branding/Public
Right Thing to Do
Internal Corporate
Environmental
Market Transformation
Higher Building value
Global competitiveness
Local competition
Regulations
Commitment
Relations
FIGURE 9: TRIGGERS DRIVING FUTURE GREEN BUILDING ACTIVITY (MCGRAW HILL CONSTRUCTION,
2013)
What was not mentioned at all in the interviews, but was in the literature (Hwang &
Tang, 2010; Kibert, 2010), are environmental regulations. In the authors opinion the
regulations for new buildings are already very high in Austria, which is guaranteed with
the mandatory use of the energy performance certificate. The competitiveness was also
not mentioned by any interviewee, and does not play a large role in Europe and espe-
cially in Austria due to the high legal requirements, like the EPBD, the energy perfor-
mance certificate and the climate strategy of Austria.
4.3.2 Challenges Increasing Green Building Activity
In Figure 10 it can be seen that the variations between the two time periods is not that
big in the obstacles for increasing green building activities. What was mentioned as the
biggest challenge are the higher first costs. This argument was also brought up in the
interview above. However two experts and also some authors in the literature (World
Green Building Council, 2013; Hotel Energy Solutions, 2011; Sloan et. al, 2009) argue
that the costs are often perceived higher than they really are. The second most men-
tioned answer in this survey was the lack of political support and incentives.
69
Challenges to Increasing Green Building Activity

2008 2012
80% 76%
49% 48% 46%

38% 36%
32% 30% 29% 29% 29%
17%
10%
Higher First Costs
Support/Incentives
Operating Cost Savings
Lack of Market
Affordability - Green is
Lack of Public
Building Professionals
Lack of trained Green
Awareness
Challenge with Split
Lack of Political
Demand
Expenditure and
Between Capital
High-End
FIGURE 10: CHALLENGES TO INCREASING GREEN BUILDING ACTIVITY (MCGRAW HILL CONSTRUCTION,
2013)
Generally the Austrian Government offers a number of incentives for all kind of sus-
tainable projects. One of them is the Austrian climate fund of the federal government. It
offers incentives to private people, companies, regional governments, research institutes
and other target groups, like farming. The budget for supporting energy projects
amounts 140 million Euros in 2013. The main focus and objectives are e-mobility and
Zero Emission Austria which focuses especially on energy efficiency and smart ener-
gy technologies (Klima- und Energiefonds, 2013).
For the hotel industry in particular the Austrian Government together with the HT, the
Austrian Hotel and Tourism Bank facilitate the TOP tourism fund. This focuses espe-
cially on the quality optimization of hospitality and tourism enterprises. These would
include energy-saving measures, e.g. insulation of buildings or the installation of new
windows, also the implementation of renewable energy technologies but also focuses on
things like quality improvement or plant size optimization (sterreichische Hotel- und
Tourismusbank Ges.m.b.H., 2011).
In addition to the TOP tourism fund, the UFI is also a program of funding redevelop-
ment measures in the energy system for industrial and commercial enterprises. Typical
70
projects are all renewable energy technologies but also the connection to district heat-
ing, dwellings thermal rehabilitation, investments for the reduction of emissions and
waste and many more. For the period of 2011 to 2015 the annual funding budget of 90
million per year is increased by 100 million per year especially for thermal remedia-
tion (Lebensministerium II/3, 2012).
What was very often mentioned in the survey was the split between capital expenditure
and operating cost savings and the lack of public awareness. Especially in the hospitali-
ty industry it is still hard to charge more for the rooms when they are green. In addition
the guests need to be more informed about their benefits of green buildings, in order to
also increase the public awareness about the topic. This was also mentioned by the ex-
perts in the interviews.
The lack of trained green building professionals decreased by 29%, which shows that
more and more people are becoming more aware of the topic. The number of Green
Building Councils all over the world was also growing and the organizations themselves
are also more interested in the topic. This was also not mentioned in the interviews, as
the DGNB in Germany and the GNI in Austria are constantly growing and a lot of
companies show their interest in becoming experts for their own projects. A significant
increase can also be detected with affordability. This was mentioned in the interviews as
well as in the literature. The argument that green is high-end, and the resulting higher
prices cannot be forwarded to the market yet, especially in the European hotel market.
However the interviewed experts expect this to happen within the near future, which is
also already being shown in the US.
71
4.3.3 Benefits of Using a Green Building Rating System
As already mentioned above, the number of green building councils is constantly in-
creasing all over the world. These organizations are also establishing measures to assess
green buildings and sustainable construction or use already existing measures for their
assessment. However these assessment schemes show a couple of benefits and chal-
lenges as well.
Benefits of Using a Green Building Rating System

2008 2012
69% 73%
67%
50%
43% 41% 40%
19% 20%
0% 0% 0%
Performing Building
Advantage/Recognitio
Creates Opportunity to
Encourages Use of an
Provides a Common
Offers Government or
Learn more About the
Creates Ability to
Provides Marketing
Incentives/Rebates
Specific Elements of
Integrated Design
Language in the
Create a Better
and Competitive
Local Financial
Green Building
Industry
Team
n
FIGURE 11: BENEFITS OF USING A GREEN BUILDING RATING SYSTEM (MCGRAW HILL CONSTRUCTION,
2013)
Figure 11 shows the benefits of Green Building Rating Schemes, whereas the challeng-
es will be explained and developed in chapter 4.3.4. As main benefit, the ability to cre-
ate better performing building was mentioned. With the help of the rating systems cer-
tain standards and requirements need to be met, which as a result lead to better perform-
ing buildings in general. As the interviews and the literature mention, this can be met
especially if the green building rating system is already integrated at a very early stage,
importantly the design stage.
The second most mentioned answer was the marketing and competitive advantage. This
was also agreed upon in the literature and the interviews. Especially the awarding pro-
cess is finalized with a big presentation including media and the local community. As a
72
result the recognition for this building increases and the level of certification is often
displayed at the entrance. Also in the hospitality industry, the companies can use such
certificates to better integrate their business in the regional economic environment and
can present their efforts concerning a more sustainable operation.
Some interview partners above also mentioned the third benefit of learning more about
specific elements of a green building. Especially in the case of Falkensteiner, which was
the first hotel certified in Austria, they mentioned that they learned a lot from this pro-
ject and that this is going to help them in implementing such systems in further projects.
Nevertheless the other three benefits were not really mentioned in the interviews; how-
ever they were all slightly touched on in the literature. Through the use of green build-
ing systems, the design team needs to communicate closer and the involvement of each
stakeholder in almost each step is very important. In Europe the common language in
the industry is already given through the EPBD. Finally the incentives have neither been
touched by the literature, nor by the interviews. According to McGraw Hill
Construction (2013) this focuses more on Singapore, where this was mentioned as the
second biggest benefit.
4.3.4 Reasons for Not Using Green Building Rating Systems
According to figure 12, the literature and the expert interviews agree that the length of
time it takes to assess a green building poses the biggest challenge to the costs. Espe-
cially in the Austrian hotel market, a major part of which consists of SMEs, the time
span and the high costs are often not appropriate in that scope. Also the costs of an as-
sessment cannot yet be included into the hotel room prices, as the risk of negative guest
reviews would increase.
73
Reasons for Not Using Green Building Rating Systems

2008 2012
61%
42% 41%
36%
24%
15%
Too Costly/Time Intensive Not Tailored to Regional Climate Difficult to Understand

and Cultural Implications Requirements/Documentation
Processes
FIGURE 12: REASONS FOR NOT USING GREEN BUILDING RATING SYSTEMS (MCGRAW HILL
CONSTRUCTION, 2013)
A second argument was that the assessment schemes are not tailored to regional and
cultural implications. This was also mentioned in the literature. However the increasing
number of national green building councils has supported the shift to more regional cli-
mates. One of the strengths of the DGNB system, which is used in more than 20 coun-
tries worldwide, is that it considers national norms and requirements and is adapted for
all of the assessment criteria. This is also the reason for the decreased frequency of this
answer compared to 2008.
Also the decreased frequency of the answer difficult to understand require-

ments/documentation processes can be tracked back to the increased number of rating
systems and the increased number of green building professionals.
74
5 CONCLUSIONS
The overall aim of this research was to detect obstacles in applying the DGNB certifica-
tion scheme on hotel buildings and explore the main reasons for these barriers. As a
result, recommendations to overcome these obstacles will be provided. In order to better
work out these short-comings in the special case of hotel buildings the following re-
search specifics were set:
Identify the forces driving green building certification and the barriers to the
successful implementation in the hotel industry.
Explore green-building expert views and practices related to green building cer-
tification of hotel buildings, including drivers and barriers.
Formulate overall recommendations on the implementation.
The literature in chapter 2.1 identified the main reasons why the concept of green build-
ing was developed: the alarming trends of climate change, the rapid growth of emis-
sions (for which the buildings are responsible for more than 40%), the high water usage
in construction, the cheaper operating costs, the higher indoor air quality, higher safety
issues and comfort health, and the use of more environmentally friendly building mate-
rials. Through the creation of Green Building Councils, which are non-governmental
and non-profit member-based organizations formed by all members of regional sectors
of the property industry, the concept of green buildings was exported globally. However
the construction industry is a very complex industry, including a high number of stake-
holders with many different interests when constructing a building. In order to reach a
more sustainable consensus and create a more transparent and comparable information
exchange within the construction industry, green building assessment tools have been
created. These are used worldwide and are often accompanied by third-party verifica-
tion, in the majority of the cases by the Green Building Councils. The most commonly
used sustainable assessment tools are the total quality assessment systems, which evalu-
ate ecological, economic and social aspects.
Especially the hospitality industry, including hotel buildings, is often characterized by a

high energy and resource demand through the 24-hour based operation and the high
comfort level demanded by many travelers.
75
Whereas for office buildings these assessment tools have become quite common, this
has not happened within the hotel industry. In this industry, as evidenced in the expert
interviews, those in charge of implementing sustainable building assessments for hotel
buildings may not have a collective view of why they are introducing these tools.
Whereas from a developers and investors view the main drivers for green building
assessment tools are the reduction of operation and maintenance costs and a higher asset
value, for the hoteliers all these actions are strongly dependent on their attitude and
knowledge.
In general the literature review on green building showed four main benefits. Those
include the higher asset value, recognizable in higher sales prices and higher rents. Sec-
ondly, green buildings have been shown to save costs through reduced energy and water
usage and lower operation and maintenance costs. Thirdly, improved indoor environ-
ments can increase the workers productivity but also the occupants well-being and
health. Last but not least the future value of the asset and the return on investment are
secured and proved through more transparent information and communication of the
certificates. Similarly, most of the above mentioned drivers were mentioned by the ex-
pert interviews in chapter 4.2.
Generally chain-affiliated hotels have already integrated such solutions into their corpo-
rate environmental policies and have already positive prior experience with such tools.
Also the reduction of operational costs, higher performance and customer demand, the
improvement of the hotels image and higher acceptance of the building through inte-
gration in the environment were mentioned as the most prominent drivers.
The main conclusion, which can be drawn from the drivers for green building certifica-
tion schemes, is that chain affiliated hotels are already considering and integrating these
schemes in their internal policies, and they are highly feasible, as multiple goals can be
achieved.
There are also a number of barriers that impede the use of sustainable building certifica-
tions for hotel buildings. A number of obstacles were mentioned by the experts, espe-
cially focusing on the DGNB certification of hotel buildings in Austria and Germany.
First of all, a lack of suitable information for hotel operators as well as guests is men-
tioned as a main barrier for the implementation. The Austrian hotel market is a very
special one, which is dominated by many SME hotels. Especially those need to be tar-
76
geted for special educational and awareness raising campaigns to promote general sus-
tainable actions and more specifically sustainable building actions and certifications.
The reason for focusing on these hotels is that the additional value of sustainable efforts
may not be relevant, as they are often already well-established. For the future, the au-
thor recommends encouraging investments in green building solutions through financial
incentives and subsidies, and also through informing hoteliers about specific energy
efficient solutions that are available on the market and helping them to assess the tech-
nical feasibility of a solution. Additionally the DGNB certification for hotel building is
a quite young certification scheme, which was established in 2011 in Austria, and there-
fore it lacks practical experience. Resulting from this, the author recommends waiting
until the certificate gets established within the market, like other larger certification
schemes or those that have been in existence longer, in order to gather more experience.
But not only are the hoteliers lacking information, also the guests need to be convinced.
Here the author would recommend special folders and green marketing activities, like
active involvement in environmental activities or special offers for an arrival by train.
Besides big guests surveys could also influence the implementations and the hoteliers
would be more able to consider the guests special wishes.
In addition the diverse user groups of a hotel building were mentioned. Whereas in an
office building a fixed workforce who knows how to use all the features is using the
building, in a hotel building the user is often changing. Therefore the hotel guests needs
to be guided to and understand the aims of the sustainable building. This needs to be
accomplished through the building as hardware, but also through the operation of the
hotel. Especially in the case of sustainable hotel buildings the guests as the end-users
need to be guided towards more sustainable use in the long-run.
One other main obstacle for the implementation of sustainable building assessment tools
is the high first costs of investment and the benefits arising from the certification, which
are not really recognizable especially not with increased bookings. This is due to the
guests booking behavior, which is commonly based on price, special offers and loca-
tion. The authors recommendation would include the market penetration of green
booking platforms and websites, but also through green marketing activities in order to
increase the guests awareness and their willingness to pay more for a more sustainable
hotel room. Nevertheless in the European markets the financial costs of the certification
77
and implementation are not yet ready to pass onto the guest room prices.
In relation to the two above mentioned barriers, the increased number of employees and
personnel time for implementing, maintenance and training was mentioned. As already
mentioned, the DGNB certification is a very young certificate, therefore little prior
knowledge exists. As it is also a very comprehensive system, including a lot of different
factors and requiring very detailed data and document collection, it requires a lot of ef-
fort, which may also lead to additional costs. Also the education of all employees and
guests about the new technology in each part of the hotels operation takes a large
amount of the personnels time and may result in additional costs. Respectively these
additional costs cannot be passed on the guest room prices.
The main conclusion that can be drawn from this research on the evident obstacles in
applying the DGNB certification on hotel buildings are that voluntary involvement of
hoteliers still strongly depends on the hoteliers attitude and knowledge. Consequently
three main barriers hindering sustainable building certification tools are a lack of suita-
ble information, the diverse user groups, and the lack of demand and pressure on the
European market to pass the increased first investment costs and the potential higher
personnel costs onto the hotel room prices.
From the conclusions the fifth recommendation to be made is that hoteliers and hotel
developers should be aware of why introducing sustainable building certification of
hotel buildings would benefit the operators, guests and developers and the external fac-
tors that are influencing the decision. Above all, the stakeholders need to ensure that the
information of the sustainable building certification is clear, transparent and communi-
cated to those in charge of implementing the certification into the operation of the hotel,
for example the hoteliers, their employees and also the guests.
This recommendation would ensure that the hotelier and end-users understand collec-
tively why sustainable building certification is important, and what the benefits are to
the hotel as a whole as well as to staff and guests. Communicating this information to
hoteliers and guests would remove all misunderstandings and increase the awareness
and attitude towards such systems. Further it needs to be secured that this information is
easily accessible for each and every end-user and staff. This could be done at check-in
of the guest, but also during staff meetings. The integration into the internal policies is
of high importance and is already done by many chain-affiliated hotels.
78
Furthermore it is recommended to encourage staff to become involved in the implemen-

tation, maintenance and training.
Besides the hoteliers and staff members should receive meaningful training in a struc-
tured way that is aimed specifically at preparing hotel staff for integrating the special
features of the sustainable building into their everyday work, whether operation, check-
in or marketing.
Table 3 summarizes the recommendations in order to give an overview of the recom-

mendation and the ascertained domain.
Domain Recommendation
High costs Financial incentives and subsidies to encourage investments in

green building solutions
Lack of experience Wait until certificate is well-established within the market and
gather experience from other versions
Lack of awareness Convince guests through special folders and green marketing
activities, e.g. special reductions
Booking behavior Market penetration of green booking platforms and websites

Clear & transparent information for hotel operators and
Lack of information
developers about benefits of certification
Involvement of staff in implementation, maintenance and
training
Clear communication of the certificate to the guests
TABLE 3: RECOMMENDATIONS
79
6 LIMITATIONS
Although this research provides new insights into the obstacles in applying the DGNB
certification scheme on hotel buildings, various problems were encountered in conduct-
ing the research, which have to be viewed in terms of caveats. The topic of green build-
ing certification, especially on hotel buildings, will raise interest for businesses and aca-
demic research. However the available literature on this topic is rare and difficult to
find. The majority of the literature was made up by articles and journals. However the
fast development and the current relevance of this topic required the use of the most
recent articles and documents, which also reduced the scope of literature.
Another limitation is the low number of respondents of the interviews. On the one hand
it was a challenge to find enough suitable interview partners also willing to participate
in the research. On the other hand the focus of the research was selected on a regional
and young certification scheme, which did not offer a lot of samples. Due to their expert
positions in their field it was also very hard to reach the different interview partners. As
a result of the relatively small sample size, these findings cannot be generalized to the
broader industry based on this study alone. The use of a larger and more representative
sample size, perhaps looking at several sustainable building certification schemes for
hotel buildings within Europe, would lead to stronger results.
An additional limitation is that the DGNB certificate is a very young one, especially in
the assessment of hotel buildings. The certification scheme is very limited to local regu-
lations and in Austria only one hotel has been assessed thus far. Considering the Ger-
man market, where the DGNB certification is also used, only eleven projects were
available for the analysis. However most of the data needs to be treated confidentially
and the companies have not been allowed to give all information out to the public,
which would have been valuable for the research. The consideration of other certifica-
tion schemes used for Austrian hotel buildings would have added further richness to the
study, but this would have compromised the focus of the research and perhaps made the
load of work unmanageable.
Finally it would also be very interesting to compare the barriers and obstacles to the
application of sustainable building certification schemes on hotel buildings to the ones
of other building typologies such as residential or office buildings. If such a comparison
80
would have been made, the findings would have offered an even greater insight as to
how a certification scheme tailor- made for office buildings needs to be further devel-
oped and progressed allowing for better application to other building typologies and
their sustainability.
81
7 BIBLIOGRAPHY
FMTG - Falkensteiner Michaeler Tourism Group AG. (2010). We live Tourism. Retrieved Mai 07,
2013, from http://www.fmtg.com/en/
World Green Building Council. (2013). About World GBC. Retrieved March 16, 2013, from
http://www.worldgbc.org/worldgbc/about/
Andaloro, A., Salomone, R., Ioppolo, G., & Andaloro, L. (2010). Energy certification of buildings:
A comparative analysis of progress towards implementation in European countries.
Energy Policy(38), pp. 5840-5866.
Auinger, M. (2012). Gebudezertifizierung Das System DGNB der GNI. Linz: GNI.
Berardi, U. (2011, September 26). Sustainability Assessment in the Construction Sector: Rating
Systems and Rated Buildings. Sustainable Development(20), pp. 411-424.
BRE Global. (2010-212). BREEAM. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from The world's leading design
and assessment method for sustainable buildings: http://www.breeam.org/
Cole, R. J. (1998). Emerging trends in building environmental assessment methods. Building

Research and Information(26 (1)), pp. 3-16.
Cole, R. J. (2005). Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and roles.
Building Research and Information, 35 (5), pp. 455467.
Cole, R. J. (2011). Motivating stakeholders to deliver environmental change. Building Research

and Information(39 (5)), pp. 431-435.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design^: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (3. ed.). California, USA: SAGE Publicationsm Inc.
Davies, H. (2001). Environmental benchmarking of Hong Kong buildings. Structural Survey(19

(1)), pp. 38-45.
DGNB, G. (2013). DGNB System. Retrieved March 29, 2013, from http://www.dgnb-
system.de/de/
Ding, G. (2008). Sustainable Construction - The role of environmental assessment tools. Journal
of Environmental Management(86), pp. 451-464.
du Plessis, C., & Cole, R. (2011). Motivate change: shifting the paradigm. Building Research and
Information, pp. 436-449.
EPBD Building Platform. (2008). Implementation of the Energy Performance of Buildings

Directive Country Reports 2008. Brussels: European Commission Directorate- General
for Energy and Transport.
Falkensteiner Hotels & Residences. (2013). Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa Bad Leonfelden.
Retrieved May 07, 2013, from http://www.falkensteiner.com/hotels/bad-
leonfelden/files/hotelbroschuere_070909_deu_engl.pdf
82
Filimonau, V., Dickinson, J., Robbins, D., & Huijbregts, M. (2011, July 14). Reviewing the carbon
footprint analysis of hotels: Life Cycle Energy Analysis (LCEA) as a holistic method for
carbon impact appraisal of tourist accommodation. Journal for Cleaner Production(19),
pp. 1917-1930.
Flick, U. (2011). Introducing Research Methodology. (S. P. Ltd, Ed.) Reinbek bei Hamburg:
Rowohlt Verlag GmbH.
Font, X. (2002). Environmental certification in tourims and hospitality: progress, process and
prospects. Tourism Management(23), pp. 197-205.
GBI. (2013). Green Building Programs. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from

http://www.thegbi.org/green-globes/
GBI, T. G. (n.d.). Green Globes. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from The practical Building Rating
System: http://www.greenglobes.com/default.asp
Hlousek, P. (2012). Hotelzertifizierung: Positive Effekte auf verschiedenen Ebenen. WEKA

Praxischeck(1-2), pp. 32-35.
Hotel Energy Solutions. (2011). Factors and Initiatives affecting Energy Efficiency use in the
Hotel industry. Hotel Energy Solutions project publications.
Hwang, B.-G., & Tan, J. S. (2010, July 19). Green Building Project Management: Obstacles and
Solutions for Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development(20), pp. 335-349.
ISA, I. (2009). Die sterreichische Entsorgungswirtschaft - Daten und Fakten. Wien, Austria.
Jilek, W. (2011). Implementation of the EPBD in Austria - Status in Novemeber 2010. Brussels:
European Union.
Kibert, C. (2008). Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.
Klima- und Energiefonds. (2013). Jahresprogramm 2013 des Klima- und Energiefonds. Vienna:
Klima- und Energiefonds .
Lam, P., Chan, E., Poon, C., Chau, C., & Chun, K. (2009, October 22). Factors affecting the
implementation of green specifications in construction. Journal of Environmental
Management(91), pp. 654-661.
Lebensministerium II/3. (2012). UFI - Umweltfrderung im Inland. Retrieved April 18, 2013,
from http://www.lebensministerium.at/umwelt/klimaschutz/ufi/ufi.html
Lebensministerium V/4. (2012). berarbeitung der Klimastrategie 2007. Retrieved April 3,

2013, from
http://www.lebensministerium.at/umwelt/klimaschutz/klimapolitik_national/klimastr
ategie/Klimastrategie.html
83
Makkie, H. E. (2010). Green Building: Nachhaltigkeitszertifikate im Bausektor. Hamburg:

Diplomica Verlag GmbH.
Maly, M. (2012, May 31). Michaeler und Partner News - Wie nachhaltig sind
Umweltzertifikate? Retrieved February 27, 2013, from http://www.michaeler-
partner.com/de/news.html
McGraw Hill Construction. (2013). World Green Building Trends: Business Benefits Driving New
and Retrofit Market Opportunities in Over 60 Countries - Smart Market Report. USA,
Bedford: McGraw Hill Construction.
GNI. (2009). Nachhaltiges Bauen und Bewirtschaften. Etablierung der sterreichischen

Gesellschaft fr Nachhaltige Immobilienwirtschaft". Linz, Austria: GNI.
GNI. (2011, August 01). Nutzungsprofile Neubau Hotelgebude 2011. Retrieved April 10,
2013, from http://www.ogni.at/de/neubauhotelgebaeude/
GNI. (2012). DGNB Systembroschre. Linz, Austria: GNI.
GNI. (2013). GNI. Retrieved March 29, 2013, from sterreichische Gesellschaft fr
Nachhaltige Immobilienwirtschaft: http://www.ogni.at/de/
sterreichische Hotel- und Tourismusbank Ges.m.b.H. (2011). TOP-Tourismus-Frderung.

Retrieved April 18, 2013, from http://www.oeht.at/finanzierung-und-
foerderungen/top-tourismus-foerderung/
Reeder, L. (2010). Guide to Green Building Rating Systems. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Ronning, A., & Brekke, A. (2009). Puttin' on the Ritz - but what are the emissions? Aalborg,
Denmark: Joint Actions on Climate Change conference.
Schuetze, P. D. (2012). Towards sustainable architecture and urbanism through responsible

tourism and the realization of zero-emission hotels. Retrieved Februrary 11, 2013, from
http://upcommons.upc.edu/revistes/bitstream/2099/12606/1/C_101_3.pdf
Sedlacek , S., & Maier, G. (2012, July 18). Can green building councily serve as third party
governance institutions? An economic and institutional analysis. Energy Policy(49), pp.
479-487.
Seo, S., Tucker, S., Ambrose, M., Mitchell, P., & Wang, C. (2006). Technical Evaluation of
Environmental Assessment Rating Tools. In R. a. Corporation (Ed.), Project No.
PN05.1019.
Silvermann, D. (2010). Doing Qualitative Research (3. ed.). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Sloan, P., Legrand, W., & Chen, J. (2009). Eco-Design in Hospitality Architecture. In
Sustainability in the hospitality industry (pp. 49-60). Burlington USA: Elsevies Inc.
84
Statistik Austria. (2013, March 23). NAMEA. Retrieved from

http://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/energie_und_umwelt/umwelt/namea/ind
ex.html
Statistik Austria. (2013). Tourismus. Retrieved March 2013, 23, from Tourismus-
Satellitenkonto: http://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/tourismus/index.html
UNEP, U. (2009). Buildings and Climate Change - Summary for Decision-Makers. Paris, France:
UNEP Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch.
USGBC, U. G. (2013). LEED. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://www.usgbc.org/leed
Vito Albino, A. B. (2009). Environmental Strategies an Green Product Development: an

Overview on Sustainability-Driven Companies. Business Strategy and the
Environment(18), pp. 83-96.
Vito Albino, U. B. (2012, March 26). Green buildings and organizational changes in Italian case
studies. Business Strategy and the Environment(21), pp. 387-400.
World Green Building Council. (2013). The Business Case for Green Building. Toronto, Canada:
World Green Building Council .
Yau, R., Cheng, V., & Yin, R. (2006). Building performance assessment in China. Beijing:
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Intelligent Green and Energy
Efficient Building and Technologies and Products Expo.
Yudelson, J. (2007). Green Building A to Z (1. ed.). Canada: New Society Publishers.
85
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Questionnaire/interview schedule
Experte: ________________________________________________________________
Projekt:_________________________________________________________________
Projektart:
a) Ferienhotel
b) Stadthotel
c) Wellnesshotel
d) Seminarhotel
Die Themen Ressourcenschonung, Werterhalt und Nutzerkomfort werden in der Baubranche

immer wichtiger. Planer, Erbauer und Betreiber von Immobilien rcken diese Ziele immer
mehr in den Vordergrund. Um diese Werte transparent darzustellen werden nachhaltige Zerti-
fizierungssysteme immer mehr gefragt und bei vielen verschiedenen Immobilientypen einge-
setzt, so auch bei Hotels. Jedoch gibt es noch nicht sehr viele DGNB zertifizierte Hotelgebude.
Ziel der Arbeit ist es deshalb die Grnde dafr herauszufinden und Verbesserungsvorschlge zu
finden.
1. Wie schtzen Sie das Interesse an Zertifizierungen und deren Nutzen im Bereich Hotels
ein? (Zielgruppe, Nutzer im Vergleich zu anderen Immobilientypen)
2. Es gibt noch nicht viele nach DGNB zertifizierte Hotelprojekte. Ist das System Ihrer Mei-
nung nach noch nicht komplett ausgereift oder fehlt es an Akzeptanz?
3. Wie wrden Sie den Mehrwert einer Zertifizierung im Hotelbereich bewerten und lohnt
sich Ihrer Meinung nach der finanzielle Mehraufwand? Gibt es bereits Erfahrungsberich-
te? Privathotellerie vs. Institutioneller Versionen? Unterschiede bei Arten der Hotellerie
(Stadt, Wellness)?
4. Wo sehen Sie bei der DGNB Zertifizierung fr Hotels die mageblichen Unterschiede zu
anderen Immobilienkategorien?
5. Das Zertifizierungssystem fr Hotelgebude basiert auf dem von Brogebuden. Wie

sehen Sie die bertragung der Kriterien auf Hotelgebude? Wo sehen Sie Schwierigkei-
ten die Zertifizierungskriterien an Hotelgebuden anzuwenden?
86
6. Wie sehen Sie die Zukunft von Nachhaltigkeitszertifizierungen fr Hotelimmobilien ins-

besondere des DGNB-Siegels? Welche Vorteile sehen Sie in Zukunft in der Zertifizierung
fr Hotelimmobilien?
Wie kann die Zertifizierung in Bestandsimmobilien eingebunden werden?
87

Thesis - 2013 - MSC - Redl

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Thesis - 2013 - MSC - Redl

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Sustainable Building Certification

The Case of Hotel Buildings

Master Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the Degree

in Sustainable Development, Management and Policy

Submitted to Dr. Sabine Sedlacek

Vienna, 10 June 2013

Keywords: green building certificates, DGNB, hotel buildings, sustainable construction

Most importantly, I would like to express my gratitude to my family for encouraging

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ III

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... VIII

List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... X

2 Literature review ............................................................................................................... 16

Table 1: New and old building assessment tools ........................................................................ 24

Table 2: Summary of findings ...................................................................................................... 67

Table 3: Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 79

Figure 2: Range of Certification Fees (GNI, DGNB Systembroschre, 2012)............................ 31

Figure 3: Hotel building structures (Ronning & Brekke, 2009) ................................................... 33

Figure 4: Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................ 41

Figure 5: Assessment classification ............................................................................................. 44

Figure 6: The adaptation process ................................................................................................ 54

Figure 7: Stakeholder perceptions

Figure 8: Values of Falkensteiner Michaeler Toruism Group (translated in English)

Figure 9: Triggers Driving Future Green Building Activity

Figure 10: Challenges to Increasing Green Building Activity

Figure 11: Benefits of Using a Green Building Rating System

EPDB European Performance of Building Directive

DGNB Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Nachhaltiges Bauen (German Sustainable Building

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GBCM Green Building Council Member

1.1 Problem Background

1.2 Research aims and objectives

1.3 Structure of the thesis

This master thesis consists of five major sections.

2.1 Green Buildings and the World Green Building Council

Safeguarding water and water efficiency

2.2 The Austrian Sustainable Building Council - GNI

2.3 Sustainable Building Assessment

2.3.1 Sustainable assessment tools

Differentiation is possible between three main groups of sustainable assessment tools:

Assessment methods Origin Characteristics References

TABLE 1: NEW AND OLD BUILDING ASSESSMENT TOOLS

2.3.4 Green Globes

The DGNB certificate should be implemented as early as possible in the planning

FIGURE 1: THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS (GNI, DGNB SYSTEMBROSCHRE, 2012)

FIGURE 2: RANGE OF CERTIFICATION FEES (GNI, DGNB SYSTEMBROSCHRE, 2012)

2.4 Sustainable Construction in Tourism and its role in Austria

FIGURE 3: HOTEL BUILDING STRUCTURES (RONNING & BREKKE, 2009)

As a result the application of sustainable building assessment tools is highly feasible in

3.1 Research instrument

In addition the sequential exploratory method makes it easy to straightforwardly and

3.1.1 Qualitative data

tainable Building). This interview is based on another interview, which was

The interviews were conducted as semi-structured interviews based on an interview

3.1.2 Secondary Data

3.2 Conceptual Framework

FIGURE 4: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

4.1 DGNB criteria analysis1

4.1.1 Building types

4.1.2 Austrian DGNB criteria assessment

FIGURE 5: ASSESSMENT CLASSIFICATION

4.1.3 Austrian DGNB criteria: Hotel buildings vs. Office buildings

4.1.3.1 Environmental quality aspect