クレジット対応付け、枠組み再構築、認証レベル移行予測：LEED v4.1とv5 BD+C評価システムの公式テキストレベル比較

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:認証制度改定が既存資産の評価に与える定量的影響を測る手法（クレジット対応付け＋移行予測）の参考になる。

🏢実務担当者:v4.1からv5への移行計画において、どのクレジットでスコアを失いやすいかを事前に把握し、設計・調達の優先順位を決められる。

🏛政策担当者:民間認証の要件厳格化が建築ストックの評価ギャップを生む点は、国内省エネ基準や開示制度の段階的引き上げ設計の参考になる。

This study systematically compares the LEED v4.1 and LEED v5 Building Design and Construction (BD+C) rating systems, combining an official-text-level mapping of all 42 scored credits with an empirical score-migration projection of 49 v4.1-certified projects. LEED v5 marks a fundamental shift from a technology-oriented, credit-counting framework to a goal-driven, impact-based system organized around three core areas: decarbonization, quality of life, and ecosystem restoration. Across the BD+C family, credit entries decreased from 51 to 34 while prerequisites increased from 15 to 17, indicating greater emphasis on mandatory requirements. The most profound restructuring occurs in Materials and Resources and Indoor Environmental Quality, where embodied-carbon assessment becomes a mandatory prerequisite and occupant experience is integrated with performance verification, resilience, and equity; changes in Energy and Atmosphere are incremental by comparison. Human Impact Assessment and Climate Resilience Assessment are elevated to mandatory prerequisites, and Platinum certification imposes absolute performance targets, including full electrification and 100% renewable energy. The projection shows that 65.3% of the sampled projects would lose at least one certification level under the conservative scenario (42.9–100% across sensitivity runs), revealing a systematic score-recapture effect of the framework restructuring. These findings provide project teams, manufacturers, and policymakers with an evidence base for planning the v4.1-to-v5 transition.

• semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings16214426first seen 2026-11-13 06:02:03