Estidama and the Pearl Rating System: A Comprehensive Review and Alignment with LCA

Ayyagari Ramani,Borja García De Soto

doi:10.3390/su13095041

Ayyagari Ramani, Borja García De Soto

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095041

Copy DOI

Abstract

Multiple sustainability standards and rating systems have been developed to draw attention to constructing sustainable buildings. The Pearl Rating System (PRS) is a mandate for all new construction projects in Abu Dhabi. Hence, it is important to understand the main components, advantages, and limitations of the PRS. The feasibility and the practical relevance of the PRS are still being studied. This paper addresses this gap and critically evaluates the PRS against some of the well-established rating systems like LEED and BREEAM. The analysis suggests that the PRS considers the cultural aspect of sustainability, in addition to the environmental, societal, and economic aspects. It was also found that most rating systems, including the PRS, have a very superficial inclusion of life cycle assessment (LCA). The paper finally concludes with other observations and outlook for a more robust implementation of the PRS.

Highlights

life cycle assessment (LCA) is described as a tool to evaluate potential environmental impacts and the resources utilized through the life cycle of a product, i.e., from raw material procurement, through production and use, to waste management (ISO/TC 207/SC 5, 2007)
This study provides a review of Estidama, a sustainability initiative by the Abu Dhabi Urban Planning Council (AD-UPC), and its rating system
This study critically evaluated the Pearl Rating System (PRS) against internationally recognized rating systems, such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM)

Summary

Introduction

The authors of [2] indicated that LCA is characterized by certain aspects that most assessment tools may not be able to address They classify LCA characteristics in four categories: (a) LCA considers a life cycle perspective, (b) LCA consists of a wide range of environmental issues, (c) LCA is quantitative about the impacts assessed, and (d) LCA has its base on natural sciences. LCA is a comprehensive tool resulting from its life cycle perspective and its spread across various environmental concerns. This elaborate system may be a limitation because it is prone to simplification and generalization in modeling or assessing environmental impacts.

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion