## 3 Results and Discussion
### Materials and Resources
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Credit/Category**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Country/\(\mathbf{\xi_{1}}\)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Possible**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Achieved Points**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\mathbf{\xi_{2}}\)**/In\(\mathbf{\theta}\)**} \\  & & & **Points** & **Silver** & **Gold** & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{MRc1.1 Tenant Space—} & \multirow{4}{*}{China \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.0 0.0–0.5 & 0.0 0.0–1.0 & \(-\)0.44 1 \\  & & & 0.25 & **0.34** & X \\ Long-term Commitment & & The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\) & & 1.0 0.0–1.0 & 1.0 1.0–1.0 & \(-\)0.88 1 \\  & & & **0.66** & **0.83** & X \\ MRc1.2 Building & \multirow{4}{*}{China \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.10 \\ Reuse—Maintain & & & 0.12 & 0.00 & X \\ Interior Nonstructural & \multirow{4}{*}{The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.03 \\ Elements & & & 0.08 & 0.00 & X \\  & & & 2.0 0.0–2.0 & 2.0 2.0–2.0 & \(-\)0.16 \\ MRc2 Construction & \multirow{4}{*}{China \(\delta_{1}\)} & & **0.62** & **0.79** & X \\ Waste Management & & The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\) & & 2.0 1.0–2.0 & 2.0 1.0–2.0 & \(-\)0.04 \\  & & & **0.59** & **0.68** & X \\  & & & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.00 \\ MRc3.1 Materials Reuse & \multirow{4}{*}{The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.00 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.03 \\  & & & 0.05 & 0.03 & X \\ MRc3.2 Materials & \multirow{4}{*}{China \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.0 0.0–0.5 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 1.04 1 \\ Reuse—Furniture and & & & 0.25 & 0.11 & X \\ Furnishings & \multirow{4}{*}{The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & **1.45 1** \\  & & & 0.11 & 0.03 & X \\  & & & 1.0 0.0–2.0 & 1.0 1.0–2.0 & \(-\)0.15 \\  & & & _0.37_ & **0.39** & X \\ MRc4 Recycled Content & \multirow{4}{*}{The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 1.0 0.0–2.0 & 1.0 0.0–2.0 & \(-\)0.07 \\  & & & _0.31_ & **0.41** & X \\  & & & 1.0 0.0–2.0 & 1.0 1.0–2.0 & \(-\)0.20 \\ MRc5 Regional Materials & \multirow{4}{*}{China \(\delta_{1}\)} & & _0.37_ & **0.42** & X \\  & & & 0.0 0.0–1.0 & 0.0 0.0–1.0 & \(-\)0.11 \\  & & & 0.17 & 0.19 & X \\  & & & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & \(-\)0.03 1 \\ MRc6 Rapidly & \multirow{4}{*}{China \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.00 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & \(-\)0.06 1 \\ Renewable Materials & \multirow{4}{*}{The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.00 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.00 1 \\  & & & 0.00 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0 & X \\ MRc7 Certified Wood & \multirow{4}{*}{The U.S. \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.0 0.0–0.0 & 0.18 1 \\  & & & _0.16_ & 0.14 & X \\ MR Total & \multirow{4}{*}{China \(\delta_{1}\)} & & 4.5 2.5–5.0 & 4.0 4.0–6.0 & \(-\)0.11 \\  & & & 3.0 2.0–6.0 & 4.5 3.0–6.0 & \(-\)0.11 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Notes: The \(\delta\) effect size is considered to be (i) negligible if \(|\delta|<0.147\), (ii) _small_ if \(0.147\leq|\delta|<0.33\), (iii) _medium_ if \(0.33\leq|\delta|<0.474\), and (iv) **large** if \(|\delta|\geq 0.474\). 1 The \(|\ln\theta|\) effect size thresholds are considered to be \(0.51\) (_small_), \(1.24\) (_medium_), and \(1.90\) (**large**).  
\end{table} 
Table 7: LEED-Civ3 Materials and Resources (MR) credits category: The median and 25 th–75 th centiles and [PERSON]’s effect size (\(\delta_{1}\)) of the difference between the achieved and the possible points, and (\(\delta_{2}\)) or \(\ln\theta\) of the difference between Silver and Gold projects in China and the U.S.  
and Gold projects. Nevertheless, this resulted in higher U.S. Silver- and Gold-related MR category performance compared to the Chinese Silver and Gold projects. It is interesting that MRc3, MRc4, and MRc5, in their current formulation with regard to the requirement of life cycle assessment (LCA) material declarations, were first introduced in LEEDv4 and, as was mentioned earlier, these credits were performed to a similarly low standard in both the Chinese and U.S. projects. Thereby, such LCA-based reformulation of these MR credits did not receive positive attention in either country.