Estidama Pearl Building Rating System of Abu Dhabi and Al Sa’fat of Dubai: Comparison and Analysis

  • Omair Awadh
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 7)


In the built environment industry, sustainable building assessment systems provide a framework and tool to follow in order to embed sustainable development measures. While green building assessment systems are mostly focused on the environmental design and systems performance. To help developers, designers and construction stakeholders in defining the projects’ sustainability objectives and design indicators, two UAE-based sustainability regulations have been objectively assessed and major differences have been identified. A comparative analysis of (1) Estidama Pearl Building Rating System (PBRS) of Abu Dhabi and (2) Al Sa’fat of Dubai has been conducted. The analysis has been structured in accordance to an international standard; ISO/AWI 21929 Sustainability Indicators, and to another similar system; SBAT of South Africa. As construction is constantly increasing in the UAE and other developing countries, climate change impacts of buildings and adaptability measures need to be considered more frequently through such systems. In addition, the social aspect of sustainable development could be further supported by new building techniques suitable to the region. The local green building assessment systems should look at the life cycle analysis and operational phase assessment as they directly support the economic aspect of the stainability along with their environmental-social positive impact. It is expected that the results presented in this research can contribute to a better understanding in the field of sustainability regulations and environmental designs.


Sustainability Green building Estidama Al Sa’fat 


  1. 1.
    Cole RJ (2005) Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions. In: The 2005 world sustainable building conference, Tokyo, pp 1934–1939Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Voinov A, Farley J (2006) Reconciling sustainability, systems theory and discounting. Ecol Econ 63:104–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castro MF, Mateus R, Braganca L (2014) A critical analysis of building sustainability assessment methods for healthcare buildings. Environ Dev Sustain. doi: 10.1007/s10668-014-9611-0Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gibberd J (2002) The sustainable building assessment tool assessing how buildings can support sustainability in developing countries. Built Environ Prof Convention, Johannesburg, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abu Dhabi urban planning council (2010) Pearl building rating system. Des Constr. Version 1.0, AprilGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dubai municipality (2011) Green building regulations and specifications. Accessed 10 Dec 2016
  7. 7.
    Dubai municipality (2016) Al Sa’fat—Dubai green buildings evaluation system. Accessed 10 Dec 2016
  8. 8.
    Shareef SL, Altan H (2016) Building sustainability rating systems in the Middle East. Eng Sustain. doi: 10.1680/jensu.16.00035Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    International Organization of Standardization (ISO) (2011) TS: ISO/TS 21929-1: 2011, sustainability in building construction—Sustainability indicators—part 1: framework for the development of indicators for buildings 2011 edition. ISO, Geneva, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berardi U (2011) Sustainability assessment in the construction sector: rating systems and rated buildings. Sustain Dev. doi: 10.1002/sd.532Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fenner RA, Ryce T (2007) A comparative analysis of two building rating systems. Part 1: evaluation. Eng Sustain 161:55–63. doi: 10.1680/ensu.2008.161.1.55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elgendy K (2010) Comparing Estidama’s pearls rating system to LEED and BREEAM. Accessed 15 Dec 2016
  13. 13.
    Emirates Green Building Council (2015) EmiratesGBC technical guidelines for retrofitting existing buildings. Accessed 22 Dec 2016
  14. 14.
    Sinha A, Gupta R, Kutnar A (2013) Sustainable development and green buildings. Drv Ind 64(1):45–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Krigsvoll G, Fumo M, Morbiducci R (2010) National and international standardization (International Organization for Standardization and European Committee for Standardization) relevant for sustainability in construction. Sustainability. doi: 10.3390/su2123777Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brophy V (2014) Building environmental assessment—a useful tool in the future delivery of holistic sustainability? In: The 2014 world sustainable building conference, Barcelona: Paper 119Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.British University in DubaiDubaiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations