The Potential of ‘Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency for Cities’ in Developing Country: Evidence of Myanmar

The growing cities of the developing country are characterized by rapid growth and poor infrastructure management inviting and accelerating relative environmental problems. Even though the movements of the sustainability had already been developed around the world, it is still increasing in the developing countries to plant sustainable practices. Aligned with the sustainable development actions, many sustainable assessment tools are also developed to rate and evaluate the sustainability performances through the building to community level. Among them, CASBEE is developed by Japanese organizations and is recognized as one of the international well-known assessment tools. The main purpose of the study is to find out the potential of CASBEE tool reflecting sustainability city level performances in developing countries. The research framework was designed with three major phases: Quantitative Approach, Qualitative Approach and Evaluation Reflection. The first two approaches were based on the investigation of tool’s contents and indicators by means of three sustainable dimensions and sustainability categories. To know the reality and reflection on developing country, Pathein City from Myanmar was selected and evaluated by 2012 version of CASBEE for Cities. The evaluation practices went through assigned indicators and the evaluation outcome presents the performances of Pathein city’s environmental efficiency as a very good in current conditions. The results of this study indicate that the indicators of this tool have balance coverage among three dimensions of sustainability but it has not yet counted enough for some indicators like location, infrastructure and institution which are relative to society dimension. In the developing countries’ cities, the most critical issues on development such as affordable housing and heritage preservation which are already planted in Pathein City but the tool does not account for those issues. Moreover, in some of the indicators, the benchmark and the weighting coefficient are strongly linked to the system birth region. By means of this study, it can be stated that CASBEE for Cities would be potential for delivering sustainable city level development in developing country especially in Myanmar along with further inclusion of the indicators.

• Theingi Shwe
• Riken Homma
• Kazuhisa Iki
• Juko Ito

• Assessment tool
• CASBEE
• developing country
• Myanmar
• Pathein city
• sustainable development.

[1] Shuzo Murakami, Kazuo Iwamura, Raymond J. Cole. Edited by Japan sustainable Building Consortium (JSBC). “CASBEE: A Decade of Development and Application of an Environmental Assessment System for the Built Environment”. Institute for Building Environment and Energy Conservation (IBEC), Tokyo, Japan, 2007.
[2] Sharifi A, Murayama A. “A critical review of seven selected neighborhood sustainability assessment tools”. Journal Environ Impact Assess Review, Vol. 38, 2013, pp. 73-87.
[3] Sharifi A, Murayama A. “Neighborhood sustainability assessment in action: Cross-evaluation of three assessment systems and their cases from the US, the UK, and Japan”. Building and Environment 2014;72:243e258.
[4] Committee for the Development of Environmental Performance Assessment Tools for Cities. “CASBEE for Cities. Technical manual 2012 edition”. Japan Sustainable Building Consortium, Japan, 2012.
[5] Patrick Brandful Cobbinah, Michael Odei Erdiaw-Kwasie, Paul Amoateng. “Rethinking sustainable development within the framework of poverty and urbanisation in developing countries”. Journal Environmental Development, Vol. 13, 2015, pp.18-32
[6] Cohen B. “Urbanization in developing countries: current trends, future projections, and key challenges for sustainability”. Journal Technol Society, Vol. 28, 2006, pp. 63-80
[7] Haapio A., “Towards sustainable urban communities”, Journal Environ Impact Assess Review, Vol. 32, 2012, pp. 165-169.
[8] Berardi U., “Sustainability assessment of urban communities through rating systems”. Journal Environment, Development and Sustainability, Vol. 15, 2013, pp 1573-1591, doi:10.1007/s10668-013-9462-2.
[9] Orova M., Reith A., “Comparison and evaluation of neighbourhood sustainability assessment systems”. 29th Conference Sustainable Architecture for a Renewable Future, Munich, Germany 10-12 September 2013.
[10] Reith A., Orova M., “Do green neighbourhood ratings cover sustainability?”. Journal Ecological Indicators, Vol. 48, 2015, pp. 660-672.
[11] Komeily A., Srinivasan Ravi S., “A need for balanced approach to neighbourhood sustainability assessmnets: Acritical reviews and analysis”. Journal Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol.18 2015, pp. 32-43.
[12] Singh R. K., Murty H.R., Gupta S.K., Dikshit A.K., “An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies”. Journal Ecological Indicators, Vol. 9, 2009, pp. 189-212.
[13] Sharifi A, Murayama A. The potential of “CASBEE for urban development” for delivering sustainable communities: a case study from the “Koshigaya Lake Town” planning experience. In: International symposium on urban planning 2012. Taipei, Taiwan: Taiwan Institute of Urban Planning; 2012. pp. 703e13.
[14] Department of Population, Ministry of Immigration and Population, “The 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census”
[15] Department of Land Statistic, “Land Utilization in Pathein City”, September, 201
[16] SHWE Theingi, HOMMA Riken, IKI Kazuhisa, ITO Juko, “The Potential of “CASBEE for Cities” for Delivering Sustainable Development in Developing Country: in the Case of Pathein City”, 55th Architectural Institute of Japan, Kyushu Branch Research Meeting 2015, 6 March 2016, Okinawa, Japan
[17] SHWE Theingi, THAW Kaungset, HOMMA Riken, IKI Kazuhisa, ITO Juko, “SWOT Analysis Approach to Current Development of Pathein City: Studies of Town Planning in Pathein City, Myanmar (1)”, Architectural Institute of Japan, Annual Convention 2016, 24-26 August 2016, Fukuoka, Japan