IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS Related content

- Sustainable brooder for supporting local
Green design application on campus to enhance chicken in North Sumatera Province,
Indonesia
student’s quality of life N Ginting and R Hidayat

- The comparative accuracy of rapid

diagnostic test with microscopy to
To cite this article: H Tamiami et al 2018 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 309 012022 diagnose malaria in subdistrict lima puluh
batubara regency North Sumatera
province
S Rezeki and A P Pasaribu

- The growth and exploitation rate of

View the article online for updates and enhancements. yellowstripe scad (selaroides leptolepis
cuvier, 1833) in the Malacca Strait, Medan
Belawan Subdistrict, North Sumatera
Province
J Tambun, D Bakti and Desrita

This content was downloaded from IP address 114.125.58.150 on 06/02/2019 at 01:42

TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

Green design application on campus to enhance student’s

quality of life

H Tamiami1*, F Khaira1 and A Fachrudin2

¹Department of Architecture, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan 20155, Indonesia
2
Department of Management, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan 20155, Indonesia
*
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. Green design becomes an important thing to applied in the building. Green building
will provide comfortability and enhance Quality of Life (QoL) for the users. The purpose of
this research is to analyze how green design application on campus to enhance student’s QoL.
This research conducted in three campuses which located in North Sumatera Province, namely
Universitas Sumatera Utara (USU), Universitas Negeri Medan (Unimed) and Universitas
Medan Area (UMA) which have a lot of vegetation, open space, and multi-mass buildings.
This research compared the green design application to QoL from three universities. Green
design in this research that become independent variables focus on the energy efficiency and
conservation (EEC), indoor health and comfort (IHC) and building environment management
(BEM) with dependent variable is QoL. This research uses quantitative methods with
questionnaire survey techniques. The population is students from the three universities with the
sample of each University is 50 samples. The analysis uses multiple regression analysis. The
results show that green design application may enhance QoL of students. The campus should
have a good green design application to enhance QoL of students and give them comfortability.

1. Introduction
Green building becomes important things and by using an integrated approach of design, may reduce
negative impacts from building to the environment. Green building also reduces operating costs,
increases occupants productivity and create sustainability community [1]. Sustainable, green design,
green architecture and eco-friendly architecture becomes the important things to create a better life for
humans and contain some universal consent [2]. Green design is a collaboration activity in the
business which involves human resource, facility, machine investment and training [3].
The architect may create some features in their building that consider to eco-system [2]. Some
planners have tried to adopted green buildings policies in their design to meet environmental and
sustainability goals. In green building assessment, there are some indicators that need to be investigated,
such as sitting, water consumption that may be reduced, building codes and local situation [4].
Based on Fachrudin et al [5], universities should be designed to follow the green concept to provide
comfort to the users. The campus which designed as green campus may provide comfort to the users,
and they will feel their quality of life is getting better. Universities should design as a green campus to
provided comfort environment. Student and staff will comfort and get a better quality of life.
Based on the high importance of applying the green concept to the building, the aim of this
research is to analyze the influence of green concept on campus to enhance student's quality of life.

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

1.1. Green Design

Based on Ali et al [1], green buildings concepts are energy efficient, water conservation, durable and
non-toxic, high-quality spaces and high-recycled content material. In Jordan, green buildings are
needed to improve the environmental and economic performance. The variables that used to assess
green building are the site, energy efficiency, water efficiency, material, indoor environment quality,
waste and pollution and cost and economic. It found that sustainability strategy and goals should be
addressed as a major aim.
Green architecture principles consist of Water features and their management; natural building
design; passive solar design; green building materials; living Architecture. Passive solar design refers
to the use of the sun’s energy for the heating and cooling of living spaces. Then, the green building
should use renewable material and material that can reduce maintenance and replacement costs. Green
building must provide comfort because have an energy efficient, economically may reduce
maintenance costs, aesthetically for passive solar features can make buildings bright and pleasant
inside and environmentally responsible [2].
The green buildings rating system is consists of the sustainable site; water efficiency; energy and
atmosphere; materials and resources; indoor environmental quality and innovation and design process.
Green building rating systems are focusing on high-performance; energy efficient and economic and
environment-friendly building. Energy efficiency is major components in designing green building [6].
Based on Setyowati et al [7], the architectural approaches on green concept consist of land use
efficiency, water savings, energy efficiency, application of the building materials used in the
construction process to save the waste that occurs (the concept of recycling materials) and
maintenance of healthy indoor air quality. For mechanical and electrical may using an alternative
energy such as the solar cell generator system; innovation on natural lighting, energy saving in
electricity, and the application of information technology (IT) with the concept of High Technology.
Building assessment system is tools used to rank or assess how buildings or neighborhoods
concerns compared to typical practice and to ultimate goals. Then, this will be the basis for green
building policies and programs. Building assessment system focus on energy efficiency, water
conservation, site selection, building materials, waste management, indoor environmental quality, and
education. Some building assessment indicates that water and sitting issues are major problems, but
the assessed object will show different results according to its characteristics [4].
Based on [8], green building assessment refers to six parts, namely: appropriate site development;
Energy efficiency and conservation; Water conservation; Indoor air health and comfort; Material
resources and cycle; and building environment management.
Based on Maditinosa et al [9] the quality of life refers to current satisfaction. The university which
designed with green design concept will provide a good quality of life. Based on [10] Green
University is more comfortable and can significantly enhance the quality of life of its students
compared to the Non-Green Campus concept. Students at Green University can experience the quality
of life than non-green universities. Some universities that are not designed as green building try to
reduce energy consumption. They try to reduce the use of air conditioning, but they do not have
ventilation. This situation will make users feel uncomfortable. Students agree that university green
spaces can improve their quality of life.
Based on previous studies, this study will focus on three variables from the green design concept
that is considered most influential on the quality of life of its users, namely: Energy Efficiency and
Conservation (EEC); Indoor Health and Comfort (IHC) and Building Environment Management
(BEM).

2. Methods
This research is a quantitative method which uses primary data with questionnaire technique. This
research was conducted in three universities, i.e Universitas Sumatera Utara (USU), Universitas
Negeri Medan (Unimed) and Universitas Medan Area (UMA). The three universities have similarity
i.e., have multi-mass buildings and a lot of vegetation (figure 1).

2
TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

Figure 1. Research Location (from left to right: USU, Unimed, and UMA)

The population of this study was an undergraduate student with total students Universitas
Sumatera Utara is 33,000 students, Universitas Negeri Medan is 16,525 students, and Universitas
Medan Area is 6,823 students. The sample is 50 respondents for each university. There are three parts
on questionnaire form, namely data of respondents, green design concept and quality of life. Green
design concept divided into three variables, namely energy efficiency and conservation (EEC), indoor
health and comfort (IHC) and building environment management (BEM). The questionnaire using 1 to
5 points of Likert Scale with 1 for strongly disagreed to 5 for strongly agreed. The analysis was using
multiple linear regression with alpha 5% and the confident level is 95%.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Green Design

Green design concept in this research as independent variables that consists of three variables and each
variable has some indicators. The first variable is Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EEC) as X1
that divided into four indicators namely, lighting in the classroom (EEC1), the campus is free from air
pollution (EEC2), the campus is free from noise pollution (EEC3) and campus operates on energy-
efficient (EEC4). The second variable is Indoor Health and Comfort (IHC) that consists of clean air
(IHC1), healthy air (IHC2), comfort in the classroom (IHC3), comfort air in the corridor (IHC4) and
comfortable temperature in the classroom (IHC5). The third variable is Building Environment
Management (BEM) that consists of campus has many plants (BEM1), healthy campus environment
(BEM2) and separation of waste disposal for organic and an organic waste (BEM3).
Based on Table 1, students from USU, Unimed and UMA have same argumentation about the
lighting in the classroom that is bright (EEC1), the campus has clean air (IHC1), and the campus has
many plants (BEM1). It means that USU, Unimed, and UMA already apply some concept from green
design. This result is in accordance with the research by [8] which states that the three variables are
part of the green design concept.

Table 1. Mean Value for Independent Variables

Indicator N USU Unimed UMA
Mean Std Dev. Mean Std Dev. Mean Std Dev.
EEC1 50 2.96 0.880 4.06 0.867 3.80 0.833
EEC2 50 2.32 0.999 3.72 1.070 3.74 0.986
EEC3 50 2.36 1.208 3.52 1.147 3.48 1.111
EEC4 50 2.78 1.298 3.38 1.105 3.68 0.957
IHC1 50 2.90 1.015 4.22 0.790 4.28 0.809
IHC2 50 2.84 1.017 4.12 0.824 4.20 0.756
IHC3 50 2.30 1.015 3.64 0.875 3.54 0.994
IHC4 50 2.52 0.931 3.56 0.837 3.82 0.800

3
TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

Indicator N USU Unimed UMA

Mean Std Dev. Mean Std Dev. Mean Std Dev.
IHC5 50 2.18 0.962 3.48 0.909 3.22 1.016
BEM1 50 3.76 1.001 4.66 0.798 4.70 0.763
BEM2 50 2.86 0.969 3.88 0.961 4.08 0.853
BEM3 50 1.92 1.047 3.30 1.147 3.52 1.344

3.2. Quality of Life

Dependent variable in this research is quality of life is consists of ten indicators, namely: convenience
on campus (QoL1), good mood (QoL2), plants that may provide comfortability (QoL3), happy
feeling (QoL4), friendly campus (QoL5), good interaction (QoL6), interaction with lecturer (QoL7),
feel good (QoL8), life quality score (QoL9) and optimistic (QoL10). From Table 2, students from
USU, Unimed and UMA have same argumentation about optimistic with mean value respectively
4.50, 4.54 and 4.42 and good interaction with mean value respectively 3.88, 4.32 and 4.30.

Table 2. Mean Value for Independent Variables

Indicator N USU Unimed UMA
Mean Std Dev. Mean Std Dev. Mean Std Dev.
QoL1 50 2.70 0.909 3.98 0.892 3.90 0.763
QoL2 50 2.86 0.904 3.72 0.927 4.00 0.833
QoL3 50 2.90 1.015 3.92 0.922 4.02 0.937
QoL4 50 2.94 0.818 3.82 0.896 3.84 0.866
QoL5 50 2.86 0.833 3.42 0.906 3.44 0.884
QoL6 50 3.88 0.895 4.32 0.794 4.30 0.863
QoL7 50 3.74 0.803 4.10 0.735 4.22 0.737
QoL8 50 3.28 0.671 3.98 0.820 4.04 0.755
QoL9 50 3.50 0.814 3.98 0.845 4.06 0.793
QoL10 50 4.50 0.580 4.54 0.646 4.42 0.859

3.3. Influence of Green Design to Quality of Life

Multiple regression analysis conducted to find the influence of green design application to enhance
student’s quality of life. The independent variables are Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EEC) as
X1; Indoor Health and Comfort (IHC) as X2, and Building Environment Management (BEM) as X3,
and quality of life as dependent variable (Y).

3.3.1. Universitas Sumatera Utara (USU)

The first analysis was conducted to the data from Universitas Sumatera Utara (USU). R square value
is 0.536 and the residual has a normal distribution. All of the independent variables has a VIF value
below 10 and tolerance value not less than 0.10 (Table 3 and 4). It shows that in this analysis there is
no multicollinearity. Glejser test result shows the highly significant level more than alpha 0.05 that
means in regression model there are no heteroskedasciticas in the regression model.
In Table 5, there is one variable that has t value less than 0.05. It means that the variables influence
the student’s quality of life, namely: Building Environment Management (BEM). While Energy
Efficiency and Conservation (EEC) and Indoor Health and Comfort (IHC) have t value more than
0.05, it means that the variables do not influence the student’s quality of life.

4
TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

Table 3. One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized
Residual
N 50
Normal Parametersa,b Mean .0000000
Std.
.36370201
Deviation
Most Extreme Absolute .099
Differences Positive .069
Negative -.099
Test Statistic .099
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .200c,d
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.

Table 4. Coefficient Determination Test

Model Summary b
Adjusted R Std. Error of Durbin-
Model R R Square Square the Estimate Watson
1 .732a .536 .506 .37537 1.656
a. Predictors: (Constant), BEM, EEC, IHC
b. Dependent Variable: QoL

Table 5. Coefficient

Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity

Model
Coefficients Coefficients t Sig. Statistics
Std. Toleran
B Error Beta ce VIF
1 (Constant) 1.806 .220 8.191 .000
EEC -.025 .090 -.038 -.282 .779 .545 1.835
IHC .142 .101 .208 1.410 .165 .465 2.150
BEM .426 .124 .592 3.435 .001 .340 2.943
a. Dependent Variable: QoL

3.3.2. Universitas Negeri Medan (Unimed)

The second analysis is for Unimed and found the residual has a normal distribution with R square
value is 0.580. All of the independent variables has a VIF value below 10 and tolerance value not less
than 0.10 (Table 6 and 7) that explain in this analysis there is no multicollinearity. Glejser test result
shows the highly significant level than alpha 0.05 that means in regression model there are no
heteroskedasciticas in the regression model.
From Table 8, there are two variables that have a t value less than 0.05. It means that the variables
influence the student’s quality of life, namely: Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EEC) and Indoor
Health and Comfort (IHC). While Building Environment Management (BEM) have t value more than

5
TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

0.05, it means that the variables do not influence the student’s quality of life. This analysis is opposite
with the first analysis which conducted in USU.

Table 6. One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized
Residual
N 50
Normal Parametersa,b Mean .0000000
Std.
.38825023
Deviation
Most Extreme Absolute .074
Differences Positive .061
Negative -.074
Test Statistic .074
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .200c,d
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.

Table 7. Coefficient Determination Test

Model Summary b
Adjusted R Std. Error of Durbin-
Model R R Square Square the Estimate Watson
1 .762a .580 .553 .40071 2.289
a. Predictors: (Constant), BEM, IHC, EEC
b. Dependent Variable: QoL

Table 8. Coefficient
Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity
Model
Coefficients Coefficients t Sig. Statistics
Std. Toleran
B Error Beta ce VIF
1 (Constant) 1.156 .365 3.164 .003
EEC .229 .105 .297 2.179 .034 .493 2.029
IHC .371 .117 .396 3.177 .003 .587 1.702
BEM .145 .102 .189 1.415 .164 .514 1.945
b. Dependent Variable: QoL

3.3.3. Universitas Medan Area (UMA)

The third analysis is for UMA that found the residual has a normal distribution with R square value is
0.407. All of the independent variables has a VIF value below 10 and tolerance value not less than
0.10 (Table 9 and 10) that explain in this analysis there is no multicollinearity. Glejser test result
shows the highly significant level than alpha 0.05 that means in regression model there are no
heteroskedasciticas in the regression model.
Based on Table 11, there is one variable with t value less than 0.05. It means that the variables
influence the student’s quality of life, namely: Building Environment Management (BEM). Energy
Efficiency and Conservation (EEC) and Indoor Health and Comfort (IHC) t value more than 0.05, it
means that the variables do not influence the student’s quality of life. This analysis has the same result
with the first analysis which conducted in USU.

6
TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

Table 9. One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized
Residual
N 50
Normal Parametersa,b Mean .0000000
Std. Deviation .44305739
Most Extreme Absolute .075
Differences Positive .058
Negative -.075
Test Statistic .075
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .200c,d
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.

Table 10. Coefficient Determination Test

Adjusted R Std. Error of Durbin-
Model R R Square Square the Estimate Watson
a
1 .638 .407 .369 .45728 1.861
a. Predictors: (Constant), BEM, IHC, EEC
b. Dependent Variable: QoL

Table 11. Coefficient

Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity
Coefficients Coefficients t Sig. Statistics
Model
Std. Toleran
B Error Beta ce VIF
1 (Constant) 1.425 .475 2.999 .004
EEC .162 .119 .199 1.362 .180 .605 1.652
IHC .173 .124 .193 1.393 .170 .669 1.496
BEM .328 .108 .396 3.045 .004 .763 1.311
a. Dependent Variable: QoL

3.4. Finding
The concept of green design is very appropriate if applied on campus. Students have a good response
to buildings and environments in the campus. Although not all green design concepts significantly
influence student’s quality of life, this research found that the concept of green design that applied on
campus may enhance the student’s quality of life. This three campus already have a good lighting in
the classroom because supported by good ventilation, have clean air and have many plants. Students
from Unimed give high appreciation about the application of green design concept in their campus.
While UMA students have a high value for quality of Life. It means that they feel that their quality of
life is good.
Overall, students have felt their quality of life is good enough, they have good interaction with
friends and lecturers and always feel optimistic in life. The findings are appropriate with research by
[1], [5], and [10] who stated that green design concept might provide sustainability community and
enhance the quality of life of its users.

7
TALENTA-CEST 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 309 (2018) 012022 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/309/1/012022
1234567890‘’“”

4. Conclusions
Building assessments that apply green concepts based on several variables. This study only focuses on
three variables that are considered important and have a great impact on the building and quality of
life of its users. The three variables are energy efficiency and conservation, indoor health and comfort
and building environment management. These three variables were found influence the quality of life
of students on the campus of USU, Unimed, and UMA. In USU and UMA, building environment
management is influence student's quality of life. While in Unimed, energy efficiency and
conservation and indoor health and comfort influence student's quality of life. The campus should
apply the concept of green design on the building and its environment to enhance the quality of life of
its users consisting of students, staff, and lecturers. This study is expected to be a reference for further
research using a complete variable.

References
[1] Ali H H and Nsairat S F 2009 Developing a Green Building Assessment Tool for Developing
Countries Case of Jordan Building and Environment 44 p. 1053-1064
[2] Ragheb A, El-Shimyb H and Raghebb G 2016 Green Architecture: A Concept of Sustainability
Procedia Social and Behavioral Science 216 p. 778-787
[3] Yazid M, Udin Z, and Abdul G A 2015 The Collaboration of Green Design and Technology
Towards Business Sustainability in Malaysian Manufacturing Industry Procedia Social and
Behavioral Science 211 p. 237-242
[4] Retzlaff R C 2008 Green Building assessment System Journal of the American Planning
Association vol 74 No 4 p. 506
[5] Fachrudin H T and Fachrudin K A 2016 Influence of Green Campus Application To Quality of
Life Proc. 1st Int. Conference on Liveable Built Environment (Bali, Indonesia) p. 130-134
[6] Gowri K 2004 Green Building Rating System: An Overview ASHRAE Journal 46 11 p. 56
[7] Setyowati E, Harani A R and Falah Y N 2013 Green Building Design Concepts of Healthcare
Facilities On the Orthopedic Hospital in The Tropics Procedia Social and Behavioral Science
101 p. 189-199
[8] Green Building Council Indonesia 2015 Perangkat Penilaian Greenship
[9] Maditinosa, Papadopoulos and LluisPratsc 2014 The Free Time Allocation and its Relationship
with The Perceived Quality of Life (QoL) and Satisfaction with Life (SwL) Procedia
Economics and Finance Vol. 7 p. 519-532
[10] Tiyarattanachai R and Hollmann N M 2014 Green Campus initiative and its impacts on quality
of life of stakeholders in Green and Non‑Green Campus Universities SpringerPlus Vol. 84 No.
5 p. 1-17