THESIS ABSTRACT

Abstract

Although green building technologies have gained recognition as an effective approach to reducing energy and water consumption, concerns still persist regarding high initial expenses and lack of adequate knowledge and experience among stakeholders associated with green buildings. The objectives of the study were to compare the perception of engineers and architects on green building practices, challenges and opportunities on residential construction in Kathmandu Valley and life cycle cost benefits of constructing green buildings in comparison to conventional buildings. This study conducted a questionnaire survey of 104 respondents – engineers and architects working in Kathmandu Valley – to investigate their perceptions of green residential building design. The data obtained from the questionnaire survey was analyzed by using Mann Whitney U test to ascertain the difference in perception among these two groups (engineers and architects) regarding green building practices. The Relative Importance Index (RII) was used to rank the challenges and solutions to green building practices. The analysis indicated that architects have more positive views on green building practices compared to engineers. This difference likely stems from the architects’ greater exposure to design trends and sustainable innovations. This gap highlights the need for targeted awareness and specialized training for engineers to promote a more consistent understanding of green construction practices. The study also explored how building bylaws can be improved to support green building in Kathmandu Valley. Respondents recommended stricter energy efficiency standards, financial incentives and updated codes to include renewable energy, water conservation, and sustainable materials. Capacity building and better monitoring were also identified as crucial for effective green building adoption. On the other hand, it was found that both engineers and architects share a similar perspective on the effectiveness of green building practices in residential construction in Kathmandu. The lack of significant difference may be attributed to shared professional exposure, industry standards, and common educational background. Key challenges identified include vii a lack of awareness among clients and professionals, insufficient training for construction teams, and inadequate policy frameworks. The study used the Net Present Value (NPV) analysis method to compare the life cycle costs (LCC) of conventional buildings with the same building featuring rainwater harvesting and solar photovoltaics. Although the building with green features had about 6.51% higher initial costs, it had a 67.71% reduction in operational and maintenance expenses and a % lower Net Present Value (NPV) over a 50-year period. With a payback period of around 15 years and 9 months and greater savings after 18.5 years, the report signaled long-term economic benefits of green buildings outweigh the higher upfront investment. This research found that green building adoption in Kathmandu Valley is hampered by limited training and practical experience, along with an awareness gap between engineers and architects. To overcome these issues, the study recommends integrating specialized green building education into both engineering and architecture curricula, and offering ongoing professional development. It also calls for collaboration among policymakers, industry stakeholders and training institutions to support sustainable construction through targeted campaigns, government action, and regulatory reforms.

Keywords

Green Building Concept, Engineers, Architects, Challenges, Solutions, Life Cycle Cost