Green Behaviors and Green Buildings: A Post-Occupancy Evaluation of Public Housing Estates in Hong Kong

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is relevant with the Journal and is generally well-written.

Few comments:

It is suggested to formally state a hypothesis for each question in the survey, and to evaluate whether each hypothesis is proven or otherwise.

Please provide unit in Table 3, in the "Variables" column.

In Table 7, what do the numbers actually represent? What do "regression results" mean? Please provide the regression model beforehand, and specify which coefficient is represented with the values in Table 7.

Please add some statistical indicators in the Conclusion, to justify the key findings of the post-occupancy evaluation.

Moreover, still in Table 7, please write the numbers in 'normal' notation, instead of the scientific one; for instance 9.18E-2 should be 0.0918.

Author Response

Comments from Reviewer 1

• It is suggested to formally state a hypothesis for each question in the survey, and to evaluate whether each hypothesis is proven or otherwise.

Response: The hypotheses proposed in this study can be summarized in three below, in accordance with research literature:

1. Whether occupants of certified green buildings demonstrate electricity and water saving behaviors.
2. Whether a certified green building is conducive to higher levels of occupant awareness in green fixtures / technologies and higher satisfaction levels of the built environment.
3. Whether green behaviors are attributable to socio-demographic characteristics, such as educational attainment, household income, household size, and the length of residency, etc.

We have revised Sections 3.3 to include the above hypotheses, and we have also included the full questionnaire in the supplementary materials.

In general, we found no evidence supportive of hypotheses 1 & 2, yet the questionnaire responses did support hypothesis 3. The evaluation of whether evidence supportive of hypotheses are added to Section “4.5 discussion”, which has been restructured to reflect the evaluation  of the research hypotheses.

1.2  Please provide unit in Table 3, in the "Variables" column.

Response: The values of Table 3 are self-reported scores in response to each question (see Appendix B in Supplementary Materials for the full list of questions). We have revised Table 3 accordingly.

1.3 In Table 7, what do the numbers actually represent? What do "regression results" mean? Please provide the regression model beforehand, and specify which coefficient is represented with the values in Table 7.

Response: Again, the values of Table 7 are self-reported scores in response to each question (see Appendix B in Supplementary Materials for the full list of questions). Explanations to the regression models is provided under Section 3.4, we have strengthened the paragraph to further clarify this point.

1.4 Please add some statistical indicators in the Conclusion, to justify the key findings of the post-occupancy evaluation.

Response: we have restructured Section 4.5 “Discussion”, which respond to the evaluation of hypotheses and statistical testing in reference to regression and VIF analysis. Yet we consider it appropriate to keep the “Conlusion” Section succinct and concise.

1.5 Moreover, still in Table 7, please write the numbers in 'normal' notation, instead of the scientific one; for instance 9.18E-2 should be 0.0918.

Response: Revisions have been made to Table 7 accordingly.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

It has been shown that green building certification does not guarantee electricity saving behaviour. As the researchers conclude, a certification alone is insufficient to induce behavioral changes, rather, efforts should be invested in conveying the green message, public education and appropriate fiscal incentives. For example, there is no point in investing in placing 4 types of sorted bins on the public highway if you do not teach consumers what each one is for, what they should throw in them and above all what causes them to sort their waste..

The certification of green buildings does not guarantee electricity saving behaviour. The relationship between income and electricity and water consumption behaviour is very strikingly negative, more emphasis should be placed on demonstrating that it is more important to educate the user on conscious consumption.

The article deserves attention, however, as comments and recommendations, several points should be noted:

 

It would be interesting to discuss the results in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda.

 

The authors should avoid using “we”, “us” or “ours”: Our finding... our evidence...

At the end of the article, the contribution of each author of the work should be indicated

 

In general, the presented article leaves a positive impression.

Author Response

Comments from Reviewer 2

It has been shown that green building certification does not guarantee electricity saving behaviour. As the researchers conclude, a certification alone is insufficient to induce behavioral changes, rather, efforts should be invested in conveying the green message, public education and appropriate fiscal incentives. For example, there is no point in investing in placing 4 types of sorted bins on the public highway if you do not teach consumers what each one is for, what they should throw in them and above all what causes them to sort their waste..

The certification of green buildings does not guarantee electricity saving behaviour. The relationship between income and electricity and water consumption behaviour is very strikingly negative, more emphasis should be placed on demonstrating that it is more important to educate the user on conscious consumption.

The article deserves attention, however, as comments and recommendations, several points should be noted:

• It would be interesting to discuss the results in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda.

Response: We thank the reviewer for the comments, which help the contributions of the paper reach to a wider audience . We have added a reference to UN’s 2030 Sustainable Development Goals in Section “5. Conclusion”. The bibliography has also been updated accordingly.

• The authors should avoid using “we”, “us” or “ours”: Our finding... our evidence...

Response: We have switched to the passive tone in these occasions.

• At the end of the article, the contribution of each author of the work should be indicated

Response: We have added the author contribution statement to the manuscript.

• In general, the presented article leaves a positive impression.

Response: We thank the reviewer again for the encouragement and constructive comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf