eres2011_307.content

advertisement
Green Labels:
Does monitoring and recertification matter?:
Informing responsible investors on the differences of sustainable
building certifications with special reference to Malaysia
Prof. Sarah Sayce
Ainoriza Mohd Aini
School of Surveying & Planning, Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture
Kingston University London
1
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Introduction
• Malaysian property investors who pursue responsible property investment
(RPI) principles may place greater significance on the certification of a
building than do investors from the wider international community. (Mohd
Aini, 2010)
•
•
•
•
Why this seemingly greater reliance may be occurring ?
Does monitoring and renewal of the certification matter?
Monitoring and renewal = greater assurance to investors?
What can we learn from other green certifications? i.e. ISO 14001, Forest
Stewardship Council (FSC) and Fairtrade Mark
2
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
This paper...
• Addresses the key practical considerations of
– voluntary nature of most certificates
– monitoring of actual against expected building performance and a lack
of monitoring of adherence to the standard during the building life.
• Explores whether the introduction of monitoring and the need for renewal
of the certification may be important factors in providing investors with
greater assurance that highly rated buildings do indeed satisfy their
sustainability aspirations.
3
Green Building Certifications
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• Over a twenty year period a number of green building certifications
schemes or labels have been introduced around the world.
• 38 different rating tools certification system worldwide (Reed et al., 2009).
• National and regional ratings established. Eg: BCA Green Mark (Singapore),
Green Building Index (Malaysia)
UK EUROPE
AMERICAS
Rest of the World
Green Star (Australia & NZ)
BREEAM (U.K.)
LEED (USA, Mexico, Brazil)
LEED (India, UAE, China)
DGNB (Germany)
Green Globe
(USA, Canada)
CASBEE (Japan)
VERDE (Spain)
HK-BEAM (Hong Kong)
BCA Green Mark (Singapore)
ABRI (Taiwan)
GBAS (China)
Green Building Index (Malaysia)
Lotus (Vietnam)
GBTool (South Africa)
4
Green Building Certifications: A spreading
industry..
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• Use of certification spreading - including Malaysia and Singapore.
• Some demonstrating cognisance of the take up and monitoring issues.
World Green
Building Council
Membership 2010
5
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Malaysia’s Green Building Index
• GBI was launched In 2009 - customised to suit the local context including
the tropical climate, economic development and the existing type of
building stock.
• Non-government voluntary effort by groups such as Malaysia Institute of
Architects (PAM) and Association of Consulting Engineers, Malaysia
(ACEM).
• Subject to reassessment every 3 years.
6
Singapore BCA Green Mark Scheme
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• Launched in 2005 by the Building Control Authority (BCA)
• Government led scheme.
• The only mandatory certification in the world (Tan, 2008):
- all new building works gross floor area of 2,000m2 or more;
- additions or extensions to existing buildings which involve increasing the
gross floor area of the existing buildings by 2,000m2 or more; and
- building works which involve major retrofitting to existing buildings with
gross floor area of 2,000m2 or more.
• Subject to reassessment every 3 years
7
BREEAM, LEED, Green Star, BCA Green Mark
LEED
BCA
Green
Mark
Green
Scheme
Index
2009
Building
Launch Date
1990
1998
2003
2005
Ratings
Pass/Good/Very
Certified/Silver/
One Star/Two Star/
Certified,
Three
Star/Four
Gold+, Platinum
Gold, Platinum
Star/Five
Star/
Good
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
GREEN STAR
/Excellent/Outstand
Gold/ Platinum
ing
Gold,
Certified,
Silver,
Six
Star
Certification Body
BRE
USGBC
GBCA
BCA
GBI
Voluntary
Voluntary
Voluntary
Voluntary
Mandatory
Voluntary
116,000 certified,
40,379 (36,588 USA +
285
3388 Abroad)(2)
Registered (3)
/Mandatory
Number of building
registered/
certified
Certification Cost*
714,000 registered (1)
£740-1,500
Certified,
155
480 Green Buildings (4)
12
certified
(6
non-residential)
(5)
£133-11,331
£2,015-4,030
£5,296 – 11,562**
£1,014 – 9,125
(5)
**
8
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Reliance on Green Building Certifications
• Growing number of labelling schemes is an indication of the serious
intent of those procuring buildings to address sustainability issues.
However,
• Various certification schemes may create confusion amongst
stakeholders especially property investors; who purchase buildings in
different countries,
• an understanding of the many differences between each market has
been increasingly harder to understand (Dixon et al., 2008).
• Unrecognised certification systems as well as lack of coordination or
consistency in rating tools are holding back the interests of potential
stakeholders (Chan, Qian, & Lam, 2009).
9
Previous research :
• Business case benefit of green building certification (Eg: Miller, Spiver, &
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Florance, 2008; Eicholtz, Kok, & Quigley, 2009)
• Importance certification to market green buildings (see for example Ofori
(2004).
• Experts say Green building certification is regarded as important to both
international and Malaysian investors, but is of greater importance within
the Malaysian context. (Mohd Aini, 2010)
why should this have greater importance within the local context ?
Whether or not a ‘one-off’ certification plays any role in enhancing
investors’ trusts that a building is truly sustainable.?
10
New Vs In-Use
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• The earlier versions of BREEAM and LEED (e.g.: LEED-New Construction,
LEED-CI) were exclusively awarded at the beginning the design stage.
• Certification is based on estimated points systems instead of the actual
performance of the buildings. Buildings are rated before showing the
construction meets design specifications.
We ask how investors can know if a building can/will actually perform
throughout the lifecycle and, in short, whether the certification can be
trusted?
• Enter certifications for existing buildings/ in-use (i.e. LEED EBOM, BREEAM
In-Use)  reassessment introduced.
11
Validity and Renewal
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Rating Tools
Year
Annual
Recertification/
Launched
Surveillance
Reassessment
LEED-EBOM
(previously LEED-EB V.1 and V2.)
2008a
unknown
Every 1 to 5 Years
BREEAM- In Use
2009
Only if
necessary
n/a
Every 1-3 years
GREEN STAR
building)
Office
(2002)
Existing 2007-Pilota
n/a
BCA Green Mark
2005b
n/a
Every 3 years
Green Building Index
May 2009
n/a
Every 3 years
Source: Compiled by authors
a
Yudelson (2010)
b
BCA (2011)
http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8876
http://www.breeam.org/filelibrary/BREEAM%20In%20Use/SD096_-_Rev_17_BREEAM_In-Use_Scheme_Document.pdf
http://www.bca.gov.sg/greenmark/green_mark_buildings.html
[4] http://www.greenbuildingindex.org/how-GBI-works.html
[1]
[2]
[3]
12
New Vs In-Use
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
•
LEED-New Construction resembles a snapshot
of the building’s expected energy and
environmental performance during
construction and for the period immediately
following occupancy.
By contrast LEED-EBOM is more like a movie of
actual performance during continuing
operation over time of the performance period.
Where LEED NC estimates future energy and
water use, LEED EBOM actually measures and
report them, compared with established
standards such as ENERGY STAR and the
current plumbing code” (Yudelson, 2010, p. 58)
13
Other green certifications ?
14
Are not ‘one-off’ certifications
Schemes
Year
Industry
Launch
Award
Validity/
Renewal
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
ed
Annual
monitoring/
surveillance
Food Alliance
1997
Food/ Agriculture
3 years
Yes
Green Seal
1989
Consumer products
Varies
Unknown
FairTrade
1988
Consumer products
3 years
Yes
Marine Stewardship Council
1997
Fish
ISO 14001 Environmental
management systems)
1996
Management
Systems
3 years
Yes
Forest Stewardship Council
1993
Wood Products
5 years
Yes
EU Eco-Labels
1992
Products /
manufacturing/
service providers/
retailers
3-5 years
Unknown
(formal)
(Coffee, Chocolate,
Banana, Cotton)
-Fisheries
-Chain of custody and Restaurant
(depending on the product group)
Max 5 Years
Max 3 years
Yes
15
ISO 14001
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• ISO was founded in 1947. More than 18,000 international standards that
provide practical tools for all three dimensions of sustainable
development: economic, environmental and societal (ISO, 2009a).
• ISO 14000 family was introduced in 1996. The most important standards
is the EMS specification standard, ISO 14001 = indicator of a company’s
commitment to environmental responsibility.
• By the end of December 2009, about 223,149 ISO 14001:2004 certificates
had been issued in 159 countries (ISO, 2009b).
• The drivers :
– improved public relationships and corporate image (Litkas, 1999; Vastag, 2004)
– responding effectively to market demand & different institutional pressures (Jiang &
Bansal, 2003).
• Certified companies performed better financially?
16
Enquiry
ISO 14001 process
Complete questionnaire
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Proposal
• ensures the improvement of
organisation environmental
performance - requires periodic
evaluation of compliance with
environmental regulations
(Jackson, 1997).
• surveillance assessment every
6 months or annually and
renewal assessment.
Confirm application and
schedule
First Stage Assessment
Document Review
Certificate Assessment
Non-conformity
Recommendation for
registration
Certificate Awarded
Surveillance Assessment
(Every 6 months / annually)
Renewal Assessment
(Every 3 years)
17
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
ISO 14001: Monitoring and renewal
• guarantees organisations uphold their commitments to maintain their
Environmental Management System (EMS) and also produce the
environmental benefits.” (Potoski & Prakash, 2005).
• strongest impacts  behavioural.
– The whole process of ISO 14001 makes managers understands that environmental
improvement is a never ending, not a ‘one-off’ process.
But,
• greatest obstacle is the high cost of implementation and lack of available
resources.
– including time, money, expertise for day-to-day operation and preparing for future
annual recertification audit (Potoski & Prakash, 2005)
18
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• The only global forest certification.
• Issued 1,041 certificates covering
143,267,679 ha, in 81 countries.
• life limited & valid for 5 years.
• The FSC accredited certification
body will conduct annual
surveillance audits to verify the
continued compliance with
FSC certification requirements.
• subject to unannounced checks,
which may increase the
attentiveness of the manager
19
The cost of Certification: a barrier?
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• Not cheap! 2 types of cost :
– certification process (Direct)
– the cost to change management to meet the FSC sustainability
standard (Indirect).
20
Fairtrade Mark
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• 19 labelling Initiatives in 23 countries.
Eg: Fairtrade Mark in UK and Ireland, Transfair in US and Canada, Max Havelaar (in seven
European countries).
• Fairtrade Labelling Organisation (FLO) has recently introduced
a common label.
• more than 27,000 Fairtrade products sold in over 70 countries
(eg: coffee, bananas and chocolates).
• Successful:
– consumer awareness of the Fairtrade Mark has exceeded 80% in some
countries.
– 15% increase in global retail value, with estimated sales amounting to
€ 3.4 billion.
21
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
•
Initially, monitoring was fairly ad hoc and was based on trust that those who
registered would uphold their fair trade principles.
•
However, as more actors entered the systems, the Fair Trade movement began
to realise the importance of a more formal monitoring system and a stricter
FLO process (Raynolds, Murray, & Wilkinson, 2007).
22
Drawing from 3 successful certifications...
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
hard work of establishing the certification does not end after certification
is being awarded!
Certification:
(1) validity is life-limited
(2) requires continuous monitoring and renewal assessment
to ensure continuous compliances to their respective standards.
23
What can we learn from other certifications?
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
• Rationale for monitoring & renewal
– Continuous compliances  Greater confidence in stakeholders
– Spot checking increase robustness
– Changing behaviour of owner, managers and occupiers.
• Challenges
– High Costs : Direct (certification ) and indirect (management etc)
– Control issue: Ensuring compliances not easy as building involves
several stakeholders
– Data capture and management: importance of updated record, good
record keeping
– Requires continuous training : training for personnel focussing on
their roles & responsibilities
24
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Conclusion
• Early certification schemes not associated with monitoring and were open
ended with ‘shelf life’.
• Newly established schemes have introduced renewal assessment.
• Recent research: Greater reliance on green building certifications.
• Learning from other certifications  Monitoring & Recertification are
important in providing greater assurances.
• Moving forward...
a green building certification scheme that does not include
monitoring and renewal provisions may not meet the ever
increasingly discerning investors!
25
ERES 2011 * EINDHOVEN
Final comment to ponder
What gets measured gets
managed...
and
What gets measured gets
better...
•
a.mohdaini@kingston.ac.uk
• s.sayce@kingston.ac.uk
26
Related documents
Download