- Email: [email protected]
Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014) xxx, xxx–xxx 1
Gulf Organisation for Research and Development
International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment ScienceDirect www.sciencedirect.com
Technical Note
2
3 Q1
Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools
4 Q2
Nayara Kasai 1, Charbel Jose´ Chiappetta Jabbour ⇑
5 Q3
UNESP – The Sao Paulo State University, Av. Eng. L. E. Carrijo Coube, 14-01, DEP, Bauru-SP, Brazil
6 7
8
Received 8 January 2014; accepted 20 May 2014
Abstract
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
The objective of this short communication is to identify and analyze the main barriers to the adoption of green buildings at two traditional Schools/Colleges of Engineering in the state of Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil. The methodological process employed is the multiple case studies used to diagnose the main barriers to installing green buildings in these two cases. The intention, of the institutions, to adopt greener buildings has been observed, considering the commitment of top management and that the institutions have put forth to accelerate this greening process. However, the barriers to adoption are evident, especially those of a technical and cultural origin. Based on these results, the study proposes possible solutions and guidelines to overcome such barriers, aimed at facilitating the adoption of green technologies in the buildings at Schools/Colleges of Engineering. Ó 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
17 18
Keywords: Green buildings; School/College of Engineering; Environmental management; Higher Education Institutions; Energy saving
19
1. Introduction
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
With the creation of government incentive programs to facilitate the purchase of the first home, mass investments in infrastructure and the development of new technologies and materials for civil construction, the expansion of the civil construction sector in Brazil is evident. The sector is responsible for significantly collaborating with the Gross Q4 Domestic Product (GDP) (Revista Exame, 2013).
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +55 14 31036122.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (N. Kasai), prof. [email protected] (C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour). 1 Tel./fax: +55 14 31036122. Peer review under responsibility of The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
Furthermore, the civil construction sector is responsible for generating a significant quantity of solid waste around the world, such as the nearly 45% of solid waste generated in the city of Shanghai, China (Yuan et al., 2011), from extracting and moving 6 billion tons of basic materials that comprise the production of construction components (Yuan et al., 2011) and the 20–40% of energy consumption in developed countries (Chau et al., 2010). Additionally, the buildings are responsible for one-sixth of the world consumption of freshwater, one-fourth of the wood harvesting and two-fifths of the matter and energy consumer worldwide (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008). With the increase in environmental awareness and a focus on preserving the environment, and considering the aforementioned environmental impacts, the concept of Sustainable Development emerged and began to be disseminated about 30 years ago. It is defined as meeting the needs of current generations without compromising the capacity of future generations to meet theirs (Wilkinson
2212-6090/$ - see front matter Ó 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004 Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 2 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
et al., 2001). The successful implementation of these concepts necessarily requires the involvement of the civil construction sector. Thus, the concept and practice of “green buildings” is being developed. They are called green buildings because they strive for environmentally more sustainable buildings that can be energy efficient, less pollutant and provide a healthier environment for their users (Richardson and Lynes, 2007; Hoffman and Henn, 2008). According to Marker et al. (0000), green building is a hot subject because the general public is often surprised to learn that the construction and operation of buildings require more energy than any other human activity. The construction of greener buildings tends to provide several advantages to the costumers, including the appreciation of the property, a 50% reduction in water consumption, 30% reduction in energy consumption and 80% reduction in waste generation, besides an average appreciation of 15% in the resale price (Green Building Council Brazil, 2012). Moving toward an ecologically sound society requires strong support from HEIs (Wang et al., 2013) and as a consequence it has been an increasing level of attention to sustainability issues in HEIs (Yuan et al., 2013); However, the green building approach is rarely adopted, especially on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), which are frequently compared to mini-cities (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008) and, currently expanding, which represents an unparalleled opportunity to disseminate the concept and the practice of “green buildings” and sustainability (Finlay and Massey, 2012). Research and practice of green issues in commercial buildings are commonly explored to commercial buildings and less studied in HEIs (Scheuer et al., 2003). According to Zhou et al. (2013) the adoption of green building in HEIs should be funded by governments aiming at a more sustainable society. Barriers to the adoption of green buildings, especially by HEIs, must be identified and studied carefully, since recent literature has little material and it predominantly refers to other countries, other than Brazil, which can hamper and delay the installation of environmentally more sustainable buildings. Additionally, barriers to green buildings identified in HEIs abroad can differ from those identified at Brazilian HEIs, and the solutions, when proposed, may not be enforceable or successful as they were in the their countries of origin (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). Taking that into account and, in face of the fact that Engineering is the area that plays a fundamental role in planning and executing projects that aim at profitability, the preservation of natural resources and support for human scientific-technological development (Zhou et al., 2013), it can be assumed that the adoption of green buildings by Colleges/Schools of Engineering is part of a very close reality. However, that does not play out. The Colleges/ Schools of Engineering encounter barriers to adoption for this type of construction and this paper aims, through a literature review and case studies, at showing how these barri-
ers behave and which ones are being faced in this context, casting a light on possible solutions for overcoming them. For such, this study aims to achieve the following objectives:
103
Review the literature about green constructions, sustainability at HEIs and barriers to the implementation of green buildings; Diagnose the main barriers to the adoption of green buildings at Schools/Colleges of Engineering in Brazil; Compare the barriers diagnosed in the case studies with those cited in the literature review.
107 108
104 105 106
109 110 111 112 113 114
2. Literature review
115
2.1. Green buildings
116
Green building is the foundation of sustainable construction and building development (U.S. Green Building Council, 2012). The term “green building”, or “more sustainable building”, does not have an exact definition, but, nevertheless, these terms have been used frequently (Berardi, in press). In one of the few definitions available, the U.S. Green Building Council (Bayraktar and Arif, 2013), in its document titled “Building Momentum”, defines a green building as one designed, constructed and operated to drive the development of the environment, health, economy and productivity about conventional constructions (Instituto para o Desenvolvimento da Habitacßa˜o Ecolo´gica, 2012). There is also the definition disseminated by IDHEA as being construction developed based on environmentally more sustainable planning, that is, that makes good and efficient use of natural resources, management and savings of water, waste management and that is energy efficient, has thermal acoustic comfort and rationally uses the materials available, opting, if possible, for sustainable products and technologies (Lee and Burnett, 2008). This type of building has been crucial for developing environmental sustainability, being responsible for mass investments in new sources of renewable energies, which aim at promoting the migration to technologies for renewable energies, such as solar cells, used for civil construction; and it is also causing a significant change in the concepts of design projects, purchasing and management, aimed at reducing the impact on the environment caused by building construction (Chau et al., 2010). Green buildings also motivated the creation of several certification systems, such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), one of the most famous evaluation protocols and environmental certifications in the world, HK-BEAM (Hong Kong Building Environmental Assessment Method) and BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) (Paumgartten, 2003). Especially LEED evaluates the building’s performance according to variables like sustainable location, efficient
117
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
177 178
water, energy, material and resource use, quality of the internal environment, offices and articulations, awareness and education, innovation in design and regional priority (Bayraktar and Arif, 2013). Generally, the effort for obtaining certification is seen in the benefits. These include the average reduction of 9% in operating cost throughout the useful life of the building (in relation to water and energy), improved quality of internal environment (such as the increase in luminosity and reduction in air conditioning use), appreciation of the property, recognition for promoting sustainability and using this as a major differential in marketing for organizations, a 50% reduction in water consumption, 30% in energy and 80% in waste generation, as well as an average appreciation of 15% in the resale price (Green Building Council Brazil, 2012). Considering the benefits explained above, plus the fact that buildings constructed according to the standards demanded by LEED can save the equivalent to 250% of their initials costs over their useful lives, of approximately 40 years (Yin, 2005), it can be said that green buildings, besides being good investments, are at the forefront of civil construction, linking environmental sustainability to an economic sector in clear expansion.
179
2.2. Barriers to the adoption of green buildings at HEIs
180
In general, the adoption of green building faces challenges and generates opportunities inside or outside HEIs. Barriers can occur in any green management initiative. Hillary (2004) reported that barriers to implementing environmental management systems (EMS) include inappropriate knowledge and techniques of implementation, scarcity of information, an unfavorable organizational culture, and the lack of or ineffective management of financial resources. These barriers are also common in the implementation of green buildings at HEIs, as observed in some studies (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). In this broader context, from a Nigerian perspective, Ikediashi et al. (2012) discovered that the main barriers to sustainable facilities management/green building in almost 60 Nigerian companies include lack of training and tools, lack of relevant laws and regulation, and lack of awareness. They found that top management must play a key role in promoting sustainable construction. Marker et al. (0000) found that more than 50% of barriers to green building are related to the perception of difficult transition or low return on investment. Samari et al. (2013) surveyed 167 professionals in the Malaysian construction industry to discover barriers to green building in the country. They found that (a) the level of developing green buildings in Malaysia is not satisfactory, and the government plays a key role in the development of the green building sector; and (b) the main barriers to green building development are lack of public/credit resources to cover the upfront cost, risk of investment, lack of demand, and higher final price of green buildings units. Bond (2011) used data from Australia and New Zealand to discover that the main bar-
156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176
181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210
3
riers to the adoption of green building practices in households are initial costs of sustainable features and lack of information about the benefits and savings of incorporating energy-efficient devices. Zuo and Zhao (2014) used the extensive literature on green buildings to consider main benefits: (a) green buildings help to improve urban biodiversity and protect the ecosystem by means of sustainable land use; (b) cost savings are associated with improved green building performance, such as energy savings; and (c) green buildings improve human well-being, such as thermal comfort and health. The fact that a HEI can be considered a “mini city” or “a small municipality” (Zhang et al., 2011) due to its size, population, complexity of activities executed, pollution and direct and indirect degradation of the environment (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008), and considering the growth of the civil construction sector, HEIs are seen to represent an ideal scenario for the development of “green constructions”, which represent a type of building that seeks to reconcile method, technologies and concepts of construction aligned with the concept of sustainability. The adoption of green buildings by universities, while having a positive impact on the image of the HEI, will also serve as a focus for latter studies, thus contributing to research projects, generating knowledge and also representing another step toward the university’s sustainable development. However, the adoption of these environmentally more appropriate constructions by HEIs tends to be hampered by some barriers. Few studies focus on green building in HEIs. Li et al. (2013) studied Australian universities, focusing on the motivations of green building adoption. They found a strong motivation to gain a reputation for green building adoption. Brinkhurst et al. (2011) researched one Canadian university and found that the faculty and staff members are equivalent to “intra entrepreneurs,” moving forward the adoption of green issues in the studied HEI. The most relevant study in this field of research was conducted based on the Canadian context. The study conducted by (Richardson and Lynes, 2007) indicated that the lack of internal leadership between the interested parties; the lack of goals that aims at sustainability; the lack of recognition for environmentally more sustainable projects and the lack of communication between designers and top management can be considered the four main barriers leading to the failure of green building implementation at HEIs (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). Fig. 1 shows the types of barriers that can affect green building implementation initiatives. The financial and organizational barriers include the erroneous perception that green buildings incur greater initial investments, the lack of any incentive for long-term reductions in the consumption of energy, water and maintenance costs, and faulty communication between the parties involved in the matter and responsible for decision-making, such as the lack of institutional top management leadership.
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 4
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Organizaonal Barriers
Financial Barriers
Green Buildings in IESs
Figure 1. Barriers to the implementation of green buildings by HEIs (Richardson and Lynes, 2007).
297
These barriers are related to the nonobservance of four core requirements needed for the successful implementation of green buildings on a HEI, which, according to Richardson and Lynes (2007), are: (a) financial perspective, that is, an attempt to minimize initial cost as well as building operational costs and constitute an operational structure that rewards environmentally more sustainable projects; (b) communication and collaboration, in relation to developing good communication among designers, managers and faculty; (c) tangible goals aimed at sustainability, such as having quantitative goals that can evaluate the success of a green building; (d) and internal leadership, that is, have vision and top management that is committed and open to green innovative projects (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). In face of the barriers identified and the requirements mentioned, the authors suggest some ideas to overcome difficulties in the adoption of more sustainable constructions, such as developing active leadership in the HEI, establishing guidelines and quantitative goals for sustainability and facilitating collaboration and partnership among employees responsible for the campus buildings (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). Till now, research conducted in 2011 and 2012 in the scientific databases Scopus and ISI Web of Science, with the key words “Green buildings”, “barriers” and “Brazil” revealed that this theme is still little explored in the Brazilian context, with a focus on Schools/Colleges of Engineering, so a study of two cases was conducted for casting a light on the topic, as reported below. Most of the research available on green HEIs is about China [e.g., Yuan et al., 2013, Zhou et al., 2013]
298
3. Research methodology
299 300
Taking into account the presumptions that Schools/Colleges of Engineering should lead the process for teaching and adopting Green building practices, the methodology used in this study follows these steps:
268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296
301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308
Based on the literature review (Section 2), identify the main barriers to green buildings in HEIs; Select and conduct case studies of two schools of engineering (or colleges of engineering) anonymously named “A” and “B” to identify barriers faced by these institutions in implementing green construction;
Compare the main statements from the literature review to the findings from the case studies.
309 310 311
According to Yin (2005), the adoption of case studies 312 approach is appropriate when “how” and “why” research 313 questions are proposed; and when the study focuses on 314 contemporary events, as the green building adoption in 315 HEIs is. Thus, in relation to the framework for this study, 316 the multiple case study method adopted is limited to the Q5 317 study of two cases at Colleges/Schools of Engineering (A 318 and B), considering that this study seeks to find out “why” 319 green buildings are not adopted by these HEIs. 320 Interviews and data collection were conducted at 321 Schools of Engineering A and B. This occurred through 322 the analysis of sites and the conducting of interviews based 323 on scripts of questions. The main employees interviewed in 324 Schools of Engineering A and B were: 325 employees responsible for the construction of new buildings at these two HEIs; top management of these two HEIs; scholars/professors who work in the study of sustainability and development of new techniques and materials for civil construction in these HEIs.
326 327 328 329 330 331 332
From Table 1, it is possible to find more details on the respondents’ profile. The field research and data collection lasted five months. Section 4 presents the main research results. Based on the data collected, the conclusions are based on methodological triangulation (visits, interviews, and documents). Interviews have great importance in results analysis because the content guides the variables/aspects analyzed during direct visits and document analysis. Table 2 presents the interview script/questions. The script and questions were flexible in their use.
333
4. Research results
344
The results of this study were presented in three sections: current situation of green building at the Schools of Engineering A and B; the barriers to the adoption of more sustainable constructions at these Schools; and guidelines and suggestions for overcoming such barriers.
345
4.1. Current status of green building
350
School of Engineering A and School of Engineering B belong to the two universities from the Sa˜o Paulo State University System and they are considered world-class in several international rankings. Both HEIs respond to an entity, the Rectory, responsible for all units that comprise the respective universities; that is, they follow guidelines from the Rectory, and they also develop their own at the local level. The Rectory as well as the top management of these Schools of Engineering demonstrate interest in adopting
351
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343
346 347 348 349
352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
5
Table 1 Brief profile of research respondents/participants. Respondents/Interviewed
School A
School B
Employees
1 Engineer
The deputy-dean 1 Professor of environmental Issues
Top management Scholars/professor
2 Employees of the work group “sustainable buildings and green areas” 1 Engineer The head of the campus construction/civil engineering office The head of campus’ space/area planning 1 Professor of green buildings
Table 2 Sample of questions – interview scripts. Interview script How is green building being applied in this school? What does “green building” mean to you? Do you have specific objectives and targets regarding the adoption of green building practices? Do you consider the theme “green building” when discussing the school’s infrastructure? Does the school have a leading expert in green buildings issues? Do you have staff/employees working on this subject? Why or why not? What are the criteria for green building? Do you have any examples of green building projects at the school? What are the advantages of green buildings? What are the main challenges/barriers to the green building approach? What are the main organizational, technical, and financial barriers to green building?
361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392
the construction of green buildings on university campuses and there is already a mobilization for this to happen at both institutions. In other words, Top Management is committed to disseminate and develop the concept and practice of green constructions. The process of this type of construction is in its initial phase at both Schools, and there is no green building under construction at the campuses studied. However, what has been happening for some time is the adoption of some techniques, materials and sustainable technologies during the construction process for campus buildings. However, they are being employed in isolation and not systematically. It is also possible to observe the School of Engineering A’s effort to accelerate the adoption process through the creation of a Work Group called “Sustainable Buildings and Green Areas”, responsible for gathering studies about the theme and for developing guidelines aimed at increasing the environmental performance of buildings, among other objectives. There is also a program called the “Sustainable School of Engineering A”, which aims at organizing an institutional policy for inserting sustainability in a broad-based and integrated manner in teaching, research, extension and administration activities, encompassing the study body, faculty, employees and specialists through work groups. This initiative generates opportunity and facilitates the insertion of the green construction concept and technique. In relation to School of Engineering B, there are no clear actions aimed at accelerating the green construction process, but it is worth underscoring that the intention exists, by the Rectory as well as the entities responsible for new buildings, it is also present in the development of each
new project and in the revision of each project proposed up to then, considering that, at the Rectory’s request, starting in 2012, all submitted projects should take into account sustainability issues.
393
4.2. Barriers to the adoption of green buildings
397
Among the main barriers diagnosed in the process for adopting green buildings by Schools of Engineering A and B, some have already been mentioned by Richardson and Lynes (2007) for a Canadian university, and they are:
398 399
lack of financial incentive for reducing building maintenance costs; lack of indicators for evaluating how sustainable a building is; high startup capital investment; technical level and innovation among architects, designers and engineers, is less than desirable in terms of environmental issues; communication breakdown between members of the institution.
402
394 395 396
400 401
403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412
Besides those barriers mentioned and identified by Richardson and Lynes (2007), others were diagnosed at the Schools studied. They are:
413 414
lack of literature on green buildings and low volume of scientific research related to the theme; lack of a technical norm that establishes a standard construction procedure for green building in Brazilian HEIs;
416
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
415
417 418 419 420
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 6 421 422 423 424 425 426 427
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
in general, the sustainable techniques and materials are recent and there is no training available for the employees involved; lack of skilled and specialized jobs in green constructions; cultural barrier and resistance in face of the changes imposed by sustainability requirements at HEIs.
428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474
Each barrier will be examined and analyzed below in accordance with the reality of the Schools of Engineering studied herein. 4.2.1. Lack of financial incentive for reducing building maintenance costs There is a significant mobilization at both Schools for adopting green buildings. In that aspect, there are initiatives underway; however, there is no financial incentive program that, in a way, could drive this process. Although the program does not exist, the government and funding entities demonstrate their interest in the adoption process in other ways. Both the government and the funding entities seek to give preference to the financing of projects that encompass the sustainability concept. In a way, this attitude generates a response from the bodies responsible for constructing new buildings at the institutions, but it could be faster and more significant if there was a properly articulated action plan. 4.2.2. Lack of indicators for evaluating the sustainability of a building The fact that there is no standardized definition of what a sustainable building is hampers the creation of indicators to evaluate the building’s performance. Without any means to accompany and analyze how sustainable a building truly is, the following situation-problem arises: a green building can be constructed; however, how do you evaluate the environmental success of such a construction? When facing such a situation, the ease of not opting for constructing a green building is truly tempting, since whether inside or outside an institution, simply developing and applying an idea is not sufficient. It is also necessary to prove enforceability as well as profitability and level of success. 4.2.3. High startup capital investment The high startup investment for constructing a green building has been viewed, in a way, as a hindrance for installing sustainable constructions; however, if compared to the diagnosis made by Richardson and Lynes (2007), in the scenario of the institutions participating in this research (Schools A and B), this barrier is much less relevant than reported at the University of Waterloo (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). This is because the top management of entities responsible for designing and managing new construction projects on the campuses, linked directly to the university Rectories, do not analyze only the design and its initial cost, but also costs on building maintenance throughout its useful life, among other crite-
ria analyzed. This entire analysis provides an overview of long-term cost management, thus providing a more detailed evaluation than just the startup capital invested at the moment of opting for the type of construction, as well as the return on investment.
475
4.2.4. Employee empowerment Although the techniques and materials considered sustainable are recent, have great repercussion and are intensely disseminated by popular media, the technical content surrounding them is scarce, especially in relation to Brazilian literature. Besides the search for innovation, it is necessary to focus on scientific research, technical research, technical detail and standardization of the green building construction process. Environmental training should be provided to empower employees, as indicated by some of those interviewed at the Schools of Engineering A and B.
480
4.2.5. Communication breakdown between members of the institution A good communication system is one that circulates information efficiently so that all those involved in the process have access and understand the information. Unfortunately, the referred to system has not worked as well as expected, since at both institutions isolated initiatives were observed to exist aimed at sustainability and at more environmentally sustainable constructions; however, there is no connection between them nor any knowledge disseminated about their benefits. In the case of School of Engineering A, a Work Group (WG) was created called “Sustainable Buildings and Green Areas”, which at the moment aims at organizing studies about the subject, elaborating a proposal of guidelines for improving the environmental performance of buildings and developing studies for incorporating these guidelines at the institution, improving communication. In relation to the School of Engineering B, communication could also be improved, especially the communication about advanced green construction practices.
491
4.2.6. Lack of literature on green buildings and low volume of scientific research related to the theme The scarcity of material on green buildings and the low volume of research on the theme are seen as a major hindrance to the installation process for green building practices in Schools A and B, considering that a less than desirable theoretical and technical framework makes the development of at least a minimally acceptable project improbable.
512
4.2.7. Lack of a technical norm that establishes a standard construction procedure for a green building in Brazilian HEIs The Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standardize several types of processes. The standardization of a process permits checking quality
521
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
476 477 478 479
481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490
492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511
513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520
522 523 524 525 526 527
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562
and, in several situations, it serves as an instrument of defense for the consumer. Thus, the lack of a technical standard that makes the green building construction process standard is one of the main difficulties encountered since there are means to evaluate whether the construction is being executed appropriately; whether the procedures used are correct; whether the materials are indicated for the situation, among other points that need attention. 4.2.8. In general, sustainable techniques and materials are recent and there is no training available for them Although the techniques and materials considered sustainable exist, the number of persons able to provide green training on them is quite reduced. In face of this situation, the HEIs see themselves at an impasse, because even if their designers develop projects or if third party projects demonstrate interest in using sustainable techniques and materials, there is no way to execute them without proper training. 4.2.9. Lack of skilled and specialized jobs The fact of using sustainable techniques and materials goes much beyond the mere execution of the project. Throughout its useful life, the building should undergo maintenance and in some situations it will need repairs. Qualified and specialized labor will be needed and, unfortunately, the number of workers with these characteristics is much reduced. The fact that Schools of Engineering A and B are public requires specialized services to be contracted generally after the tender, hampering the process. This often drives institutions to opt for not using environmentally more sustainable techniques or materials since the flow of people in a construction inside a university campus is high and often cannot be interrupted or it will cause problems, and thus need quick repairs and specialized maintenance to cause minimal interference in the institution’s routine.
571 572
4.2.10. Cultural barrier and resistance to change It is not important to install a system that does not work or that works with reduced potential. Institutions thus demonstrate a certain resistance to adopting green buildings since, after construction of the building, it needs maintenance throughout its useful life, so of which are so basic, they should be performed by the users; however, many prove to be resistant to change. This resistance also stems from cultural barriers to green issues experienced at every level of society, even in teaching and research institutes.
573
5. Discussions
574
Schools of Engineering A and B, according to those interviewed, have strong intentions to adopt environmentally more sustainable buildings, but, on the other hand, they need to deal with the difficulties that arise during this process. Possible solutions and guidelines are proposed in this section to deal with such barriers, based on consulted
563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570
575 576 577 578 579
7
literature and on the information collected during the case studies. Among the barriers identified in the Schools of Engineering A and B, some have already been cited by Richardson and Lynes (2007) in a similar case study conducted at the University of Waterloo (Canada), such as: the lack of financial incentives to reduce building maintenance costs; the lack of indicators to evaluate a building’s sustainability; high startup capital investment; green technical level and innovation among architects, designers and engineers is less than desirable, and communication breakdowns among institution members. The study proposed guidelines and solutions for some barriers, such as facilitating collaboration and internal communication, stimulating partnership among individuals involved in the installation process and the establishment of quantitative sustainability goals. These solutions are applicable in the current scenario of Schools of Engineering A and B; however, they are not sufficient for overcoming all identified barriers. Other solutions could also be adopted, such as the study and development of indexes for evaluating the success of a green building and investment in research related to the discovery and improvement of new sustainable materials and technologies, which could imply lower costs in materials, thus reducing the initial investment. The two Schools of Engineering analyzed need to establish their intention to adopt green constructions. The presence of a group responsible for working with the sustainable building theme would help accelerate the process and focus technical studies on them, making it possible to more easily identify challenges and opportunities. The barriers that differ from those identified in the literature consulted include: scarce literature about green buildings and low volume of scientific research related to the theme; lack of a Brazilian technical standard that establishes a standard procedure for constructing a green building; the fact that, in general, sustainable techniques and materials are recent and there is no training available about them, and; the lack of skilled and specialized labor and the cultural barrier that generates resistance to change. The suggestions for overcoming these problems are: incentives for research about themes like sustainable buildings; development and improvement of sustainable materials and technologies; joint mobilization of scholars and official associations, seeking to develop a technical standard on green constructions, and; the development of an awareness campaign about the theme. Besides these solutions proposed, there are others; they are broad-based and go beyond the limits of Schools of Engineering A and B, needing the involvement of other players from society. In this context, the following is suggested: create and increase investments in green training courses related to green constructions, which would increase the capacity of skilled labor and would indirectly increase the number of persons qualified to give environmental training.
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 8
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
637
6. Final remarks
638
As exposed initially, this study aimed at diagnosing the barriers to the adoption of environmentally more sustainable constructions at two Schools of Engineering located in the state of Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil, analyzing them and developing guidelines and possible solutions for overcoming them. A summary of the main results of this study are shown below.
639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681
Regarding green buildings in these Schools of Engineering, the process is still in its initial phase, but the intention exists and they have been mobilizing actions to accelerate this process. In the case of School of Engineering A, these actions moved on to more concrete attitudes, such as the creation of a Work Group responsible for the theme of sustainable buildings at the institution. In the case of School of Engineering B, this intention has mobilized the Rectory and the entities responsible for the campus construction process, but there is no sector, or group, responsible for this theme at the institution. In relation to the barriers identified, the main ones are the lack of literature on the theme; the lack of a technical standard for the construction process of a green building; the lack of training available for new sustainable techniques and technologies, and; the lack of skilled and specialized labor. Among the main barriers, the lack of a technical standard, the shortage of skilled and specialized jobs and the lack of training on the new sustainable techniques and technologies are the most difficult to overcome since it involves other players and organizations of society, going beyond the reach of Schools of Engineering A and B. Schools of Engineering are suggested to invest in: increasing the incentive for research on sustainable constructions, the incentive for mobilizing faculty for training in the theme; mobilizing professionals in civil construction for developing a technical standard that encompasses the construction process for sustainable buildings and investment in research related to the discovery and improvement of new sustainable materials and technology, since this will disseminate and popularize the materials, which can imply a possible cut in prices over the long term, and the creation of a clear, long-term measurement system for use in greener constructions.
682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690
It is hoped that this study can contribute to enriching the theme of study about barriers to the adoption of more green buildings at HEIs, most especially by the Schools of Engineering, and that it can serve as a guide for institutions that decide to adopt this type of construction, so they can handle the difficulties faced during the process with greater ease, casting a light on the barriers and proposing solutions and guidelines for overcoming them.
This study also presents relevant discoveries on the subject, such as the fact that the financial barrier, pointed out by Richardson and Lynes (2007) as one of the main ones, is not as relevant in the cases of the Schools of Engineering A and B. Even though institutions that participated in the case studies are public, that is, probably having limited financial resources, it has become clear in the interviews that the expense on green constructions is viewed positively and deserves to be made due to the long-term benefits they generate for society. Another important discovery in this study is the identification of technical barriers, relative scarcity of literature and shortage of skilled and qualified/trained labor, besides the concern about the future maintenance of green constructions as the main barriers at Schools of Engineering A and B, distancing themselves, in a way, from the main barriers identified in the literature. The biggest limitation in this study is related to its qualitative nature, to the collection of data and subjective analyses, which are typical of case studies. Besides that, the main information of the study was obtained through interviews, and respondent bias could exist. Another important limitation is that just two Schools of Engineering in the state of Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil, were considered in the study, avoiding any sort of generalization of results obtained.
691
Acknowledgement
715
This research was supported by FAPESP – The Sao Paulo State Research Foundation (Grant # 12/07263-4).
716
References
718
692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714
717
719 Alshuwaikhat, H.M., Abubakar, I., 2008. An integrated approach to 720 achieving campus sustainability: assessment of the current campus 721 environmental management practices. J. Cleaner Prod. 16, 1777–1785. 722 Bayraktar, M.E., Arif, F., 2013. Venture capital opportunities in green 723 building technologies: a strategic analysis for emerging entrepreneurial 724 companies in South Florida and Latin America. J. Manage. Eng. 29, 725 79–85. 726 U Berardi, Clarifying the new interpretations of the concept of sustainable Q6 727 building. Sustainable Cities and Society, In Press, 2013.. 728 Bond, S., 2011. Barriers and drivers to green buildings in Australia and 729 New Zealand. J. Property Invest. Finance 29 (4/5), 494–509. 730 Brinkhurst, M., Rose, P., Maurice, G., Ackerman, J.D., 2011. Achieving 731 campus sustainability: top-down, bottom-up, or neither? Int. J. 732 Sustainability Higher Educ. 12 (4), 338–354. 733 Chau, C.K., Tse, M.S., Chung, K.Y., 2010. A choice experiment to 734 estimate the effect of green experience on preferences and willingness735 to-pay for green building attributes. Build. Environ. 45, 2553–2561. 736 Finlay, J., Massey, J., 2012. Eco-campus: applying the ecocity model to 737 develop green university and college campuses. Int. J. Sustainability 738 Higher Educ. 13, 150–165. 739 Green Building Council Brazil, Brasil ja´ tem as primeiras construcßo˜es 740 sustenta´veis de 2012. Accessed: February 21, 2012, Available: 741 www.gbcbrasil.org.br/?p=imprensa-detalhes&I=293, 2012. 742 Hillary, R., 2004. Environmental management systems and the smaller 743 enterprise. J. Cleaner Prod. 12, 561–569. 744 Hoffman, A.J., Henn, R., 2008. Overcoming the social and psychological 745 barriers to green building. Org. Environ. 21, 390–419. 746 Ikediashi, D.I., Ogunlana, S.O., Oladokun, M.G., Adewuyi, T., 2012. 747 Assessing the level of commitment and barriers to sustainable facilities
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 748 management practice: a case of Nigeria. Int. J. Sustainable Built. 749 Environ. 1 (2), 167–176. 750 Instituto para o Desenvolvimento da Habitacßa˜o Ecolo´gica, Nove Passos 751 para a Obra Sustenta´vel, Accessed February 14 2012, Available: http:// 752 www.idhea.com.br/pdf/nove_passos.pdf, 2012. 753 Lee, W.L., Burnett, J., 2008. Benchmarking energy use assessment of HK754 BEAM, BREEAM and LEED. Build. Environ. 43, 1882–1891. 755 Li, X., Strezov, V., Amati, M., 2013. A qualitative study of motivation 756 and influences for academic green building developments in Australian 757 universities. J. Green Build. 8 (3), 166–183. 758 Marker, A.W., Mason, S.G., Morrow, P. Change factors influencing the 759 diffusion and adoption of green building practices. Performance 760 Q7 Improvement Quaterly, 26, 4, 5–24. 761 Paumgartten, P., 2003. The business case for high performance green 762 buildings: sustainability and its financial impact. J. Facil. Manage. 2, 763 26–34. 764 Revista Exame, Construcßa˜o civil deve crescer de 3,5% a 4% em 2013, 765 Accessed: March 14, 2013, Available: http://exame.abril.com.br/ 766 economia/noticias/construcao-civil-no-brasil-deve-crescer-de-3-5-a-4767 em-2013, 2013. 768 Richardson, G.A., Lynes, J.K., 2007. Institutional motivations and 769 barriers to the construction of green buildings on campus: a case 770 study of the University of Waterloo, Ontario. Int. J. Sustainability 771 Higher Educ. 8, 339–354. 772 Samari, M., Ghodrati, N., Esmaeilifar, R., Olfat, P., Wira, M., Shafiei, 773 M., 2013. The investigation of the barriers in developing green building 774 in Malaysia. Mod. Appl. Sci. 7 (2).
9
Scheuer, C., Keoleian, G.A., Reppe, P., 2003. Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy Build. 35, 1049–1064. U. S. Green Building Council, How to achieve certification, Accessed: February 21 2012, Available: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage. aspx?CMSPageID=1991, 2012. Wang, Y., Shi, H., Sun, M., Huisingh, D., Hansson, L., Wang, R., 2013. Moving towards an ecologically sound society? Starting from green universities and environmental higher education. J. Cleaner Prod. 61, 1–5. Wilkinson, A., Hill, M., Gollan, P., 2001. The sustainability debate. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 21, 1492–1502. Yin, R.K., 2005. Estudo de caso: Planejamento e Me´todos. Bookman, Porto Alegre. Yuan, F., Shen, L., Li, Q., 2011. Emergy analysis of the recycling options for construction and demolition waste. Waste Manag. 31, 2503–2511. Yuan, X., Zuo, J., Huisingh, D., 2013. Green universities in China – What matters? J. Cleaner Prod. 61, 36–45. Zhang, N., Williams, I.D., Kemp, S., Smith, N.F., 2011. Greening academia: developing sustainable waste management at Higher Education Institutions. Waste Manage. (Oxford) 31 (7), 1606–1616. Zhou, X., Yan, J., Zhu, J., Cai, P., 2013. Survey of energy consumption and energy conservation measures for colleges and universities in Guangdong province. Energy Build. 66, 112–118. Zuo, J., Zhao, Z.Y., 2014. Green building research-current status and future agenda: a review. Renew. Sustainable Energy Rev. 30, 271–281.
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014) xxx, xxx–xxx 1
Gulf Organisation for Research and Development
International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment ScienceDirect www.sciencedirect.com
Technical Note
2
3 Q1
Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools
4 Q2
Nayara Kasai 1, Charbel Jose´ Chiappetta Jabbour ⇑
5 Q3
UNESP – The Sao Paulo State University, Av. Eng. L. E. Carrijo Coube, 14-01, DEP, Bauru-SP, Brazil
6 7
8
Received 8 January 2014; accepted 20 May 2014
Abstract
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
The objective of this short communication is to identify and analyze the main barriers to the adoption of green buildings at two traditional Schools/Colleges of Engineering in the state of Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil. The methodological process employed is the multiple case studies used to diagnose the main barriers to installing green buildings in these two cases. The intention, of the institutions, to adopt greener buildings has been observed, considering the commitment of top management and that the institutions have put forth to accelerate this greening process. However, the barriers to adoption are evident, especially those of a technical and cultural origin. Based on these results, the study proposes possible solutions and guidelines to overcome such barriers, aimed at facilitating the adoption of green technologies in the buildings at Schools/Colleges of Engineering. Ó 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
17 18
Keywords: Green buildings; School/College of Engineering; Environmental management; Higher Education Institutions; Energy saving
19
1. Introduction
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
With the creation of government incentive programs to facilitate the purchase of the first home, mass investments in infrastructure and the development of new technologies and materials for civil construction, the expansion of the civil construction sector in Brazil is evident. The sector is responsible for significantly collaborating with the Gross Q4 Domestic Product (GDP) (Revista Exame, 2013).
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +55 14 31036122.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (N. Kasai), prof. [email protected] (C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour). 1 Tel./fax: +55 14 31036122. Peer review under responsibility of The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
Furthermore, the civil construction sector is responsible for generating a significant quantity of solid waste around the world, such as the nearly 45% of solid waste generated in the city of Shanghai, China (Yuan et al., 2011), from extracting and moving 6 billion tons of basic materials that comprise the production of construction components (Yuan et al., 2011) and the 20–40% of energy consumption in developed countries (Chau et al., 2010). Additionally, the buildings are responsible for one-sixth of the world consumption of freshwater, one-fourth of the wood harvesting and two-fifths of the matter and energy consumer worldwide (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008). With the increase in environmental awareness and a focus on preserving the environment, and considering the aforementioned environmental impacts, the concept of Sustainable Development emerged and began to be disseminated about 30 years ago. It is defined as meeting the needs of current generations without compromising the capacity of future generations to meet theirs (Wilkinson
2212-6090/$ - see front matter Ó 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004 Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 2 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
et al., 2001). The successful implementation of these concepts necessarily requires the involvement of the civil construction sector. Thus, the concept and practice of “green buildings” is being developed. They are called green buildings because they strive for environmentally more sustainable buildings that can be energy efficient, less pollutant and provide a healthier environment for their users (Richardson and Lynes, 2007; Hoffman and Henn, 2008). According to Marker et al. (0000), green building is a hot subject because the general public is often surprised to learn that the construction and operation of buildings require more energy than any other human activity. The construction of greener buildings tends to provide several advantages to the costumers, including the appreciation of the property, a 50% reduction in water consumption, 30% reduction in energy consumption and 80% reduction in waste generation, besides an average appreciation of 15% in the resale price (Green Building Council Brazil, 2012). Moving toward an ecologically sound society requires strong support from HEIs (Wang et al., 2013) and as a consequence it has been an increasing level of attention to sustainability issues in HEIs (Yuan et al., 2013); However, the green building approach is rarely adopted, especially on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), which are frequently compared to mini-cities (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008) and, currently expanding, which represents an unparalleled opportunity to disseminate the concept and the practice of “green buildings” and sustainability (Finlay and Massey, 2012). Research and practice of green issues in commercial buildings are commonly explored to commercial buildings and less studied in HEIs (Scheuer et al., 2003). According to Zhou et al. (2013) the adoption of green building in HEIs should be funded by governments aiming at a more sustainable society. Barriers to the adoption of green buildings, especially by HEIs, must be identified and studied carefully, since recent literature has little material and it predominantly refers to other countries, other than Brazil, which can hamper and delay the installation of environmentally more sustainable buildings. Additionally, barriers to green buildings identified in HEIs abroad can differ from those identified at Brazilian HEIs, and the solutions, when proposed, may not be enforceable or successful as they were in the their countries of origin (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). Taking that into account and, in face of the fact that Engineering is the area that plays a fundamental role in planning and executing projects that aim at profitability, the preservation of natural resources and support for human scientific-technological development (Zhou et al., 2013), it can be assumed that the adoption of green buildings by Colleges/Schools of Engineering is part of a very close reality. However, that does not play out. The Colleges/ Schools of Engineering encounter barriers to adoption for this type of construction and this paper aims, through a literature review and case studies, at showing how these barri-
ers behave and which ones are being faced in this context, casting a light on possible solutions for overcoming them. For such, this study aims to achieve the following objectives:
103
Review the literature about green constructions, sustainability at HEIs and barriers to the implementation of green buildings; Diagnose the main barriers to the adoption of green buildings at Schools/Colleges of Engineering in Brazil; Compare the barriers diagnosed in the case studies with those cited in the literature review.
107 108
104 105 106
109 110 111 112 113 114
2. Literature review
115
2.1. Green buildings
116
Green building is the foundation of sustainable construction and building development (U.S. Green Building Council, 2012). The term “green building”, or “more sustainable building”, does not have an exact definition, but, nevertheless, these terms have been used frequently (Berardi, in press). In one of the few definitions available, the U.S. Green Building Council (Bayraktar and Arif, 2013), in its document titled “Building Momentum”, defines a green building as one designed, constructed and operated to drive the development of the environment, health, economy and productivity about conventional constructions (Instituto para o Desenvolvimento da Habitacßa˜o Ecolo´gica, 2012). There is also the definition disseminated by IDHEA as being construction developed based on environmentally more sustainable planning, that is, that makes good and efficient use of natural resources, management and savings of water, waste management and that is energy efficient, has thermal acoustic comfort and rationally uses the materials available, opting, if possible, for sustainable products and technologies (Lee and Burnett, 2008). This type of building has been crucial for developing environmental sustainability, being responsible for mass investments in new sources of renewable energies, which aim at promoting the migration to technologies for renewable energies, such as solar cells, used for civil construction; and it is also causing a significant change in the concepts of design projects, purchasing and management, aimed at reducing the impact on the environment caused by building construction (Chau et al., 2010). Green buildings also motivated the creation of several certification systems, such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), one of the most famous evaluation protocols and environmental certifications in the world, HK-BEAM (Hong Kong Building Environmental Assessment Method) and BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) (Paumgartten, 2003). Especially LEED evaluates the building’s performance according to variables like sustainable location, efficient
117
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
177 178
water, energy, material and resource use, quality of the internal environment, offices and articulations, awareness and education, innovation in design and regional priority (Bayraktar and Arif, 2013). Generally, the effort for obtaining certification is seen in the benefits. These include the average reduction of 9% in operating cost throughout the useful life of the building (in relation to water and energy), improved quality of internal environment (such as the increase in luminosity and reduction in air conditioning use), appreciation of the property, recognition for promoting sustainability and using this as a major differential in marketing for organizations, a 50% reduction in water consumption, 30% in energy and 80% in waste generation, as well as an average appreciation of 15% in the resale price (Green Building Council Brazil, 2012). Considering the benefits explained above, plus the fact that buildings constructed according to the standards demanded by LEED can save the equivalent to 250% of their initials costs over their useful lives, of approximately 40 years (Yin, 2005), it can be said that green buildings, besides being good investments, are at the forefront of civil construction, linking environmental sustainability to an economic sector in clear expansion.
179
2.2. Barriers to the adoption of green buildings at HEIs
180
In general, the adoption of green building faces challenges and generates opportunities inside or outside HEIs. Barriers can occur in any green management initiative. Hillary (2004) reported that barriers to implementing environmental management systems (EMS) include inappropriate knowledge and techniques of implementation, scarcity of information, an unfavorable organizational culture, and the lack of or ineffective management of financial resources. These barriers are also common in the implementation of green buildings at HEIs, as observed in some studies (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). In this broader context, from a Nigerian perspective, Ikediashi et al. (2012) discovered that the main barriers to sustainable facilities management/green building in almost 60 Nigerian companies include lack of training and tools, lack of relevant laws and regulation, and lack of awareness. They found that top management must play a key role in promoting sustainable construction. Marker et al. (0000) found that more than 50% of barriers to green building are related to the perception of difficult transition or low return on investment. Samari et al. (2013) surveyed 167 professionals in the Malaysian construction industry to discover barriers to green building in the country. They found that (a) the level of developing green buildings in Malaysia is not satisfactory, and the government plays a key role in the development of the green building sector; and (b) the main barriers to green building development are lack of public/credit resources to cover the upfront cost, risk of investment, lack of demand, and higher final price of green buildings units. Bond (2011) used data from Australia and New Zealand to discover that the main bar-
156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176
181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210
3
riers to the adoption of green building practices in households are initial costs of sustainable features and lack of information about the benefits and savings of incorporating energy-efficient devices. Zuo and Zhao (2014) used the extensive literature on green buildings to consider main benefits: (a) green buildings help to improve urban biodiversity and protect the ecosystem by means of sustainable land use; (b) cost savings are associated with improved green building performance, such as energy savings; and (c) green buildings improve human well-being, such as thermal comfort and health. The fact that a HEI can be considered a “mini city” or “a small municipality” (Zhang et al., 2011) due to its size, population, complexity of activities executed, pollution and direct and indirect degradation of the environment (Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar, 2008), and considering the growth of the civil construction sector, HEIs are seen to represent an ideal scenario for the development of “green constructions”, which represent a type of building that seeks to reconcile method, technologies and concepts of construction aligned with the concept of sustainability. The adoption of green buildings by universities, while having a positive impact on the image of the HEI, will also serve as a focus for latter studies, thus contributing to research projects, generating knowledge and also representing another step toward the university’s sustainable development. However, the adoption of these environmentally more appropriate constructions by HEIs tends to be hampered by some barriers. Few studies focus on green building in HEIs. Li et al. (2013) studied Australian universities, focusing on the motivations of green building adoption. They found a strong motivation to gain a reputation for green building adoption. Brinkhurst et al. (2011) researched one Canadian university and found that the faculty and staff members are equivalent to “intra entrepreneurs,” moving forward the adoption of green issues in the studied HEI. The most relevant study in this field of research was conducted based on the Canadian context. The study conducted by (Richardson and Lynes, 2007) indicated that the lack of internal leadership between the interested parties; the lack of goals that aims at sustainability; the lack of recognition for environmentally more sustainable projects and the lack of communication between designers and top management can be considered the four main barriers leading to the failure of green building implementation at HEIs (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). Fig. 1 shows the types of barriers that can affect green building implementation initiatives. The financial and organizational barriers include the erroneous perception that green buildings incur greater initial investments, the lack of any incentive for long-term reductions in the consumption of energy, water and maintenance costs, and faulty communication between the parties involved in the matter and responsible for decision-making, such as the lack of institutional top management leadership.
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 4
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Organizaonal Barriers
Financial Barriers
Green Buildings in IESs
Figure 1. Barriers to the implementation of green buildings by HEIs (Richardson and Lynes, 2007).
297
These barriers are related to the nonobservance of four core requirements needed for the successful implementation of green buildings on a HEI, which, according to Richardson and Lynes (2007), are: (a) financial perspective, that is, an attempt to minimize initial cost as well as building operational costs and constitute an operational structure that rewards environmentally more sustainable projects; (b) communication and collaboration, in relation to developing good communication among designers, managers and faculty; (c) tangible goals aimed at sustainability, such as having quantitative goals that can evaluate the success of a green building; (d) and internal leadership, that is, have vision and top management that is committed and open to green innovative projects (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). In face of the barriers identified and the requirements mentioned, the authors suggest some ideas to overcome difficulties in the adoption of more sustainable constructions, such as developing active leadership in the HEI, establishing guidelines and quantitative goals for sustainability and facilitating collaboration and partnership among employees responsible for the campus buildings (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). Till now, research conducted in 2011 and 2012 in the scientific databases Scopus and ISI Web of Science, with the key words “Green buildings”, “barriers” and “Brazil” revealed that this theme is still little explored in the Brazilian context, with a focus on Schools/Colleges of Engineering, so a study of two cases was conducted for casting a light on the topic, as reported below. Most of the research available on green HEIs is about China [e.g., Yuan et al., 2013, Zhou et al., 2013]
298
3. Research methodology
299 300
Taking into account the presumptions that Schools/Colleges of Engineering should lead the process for teaching and adopting Green building practices, the methodology used in this study follows these steps:
268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296
301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308
Based on the literature review (Section 2), identify the main barriers to green buildings in HEIs; Select and conduct case studies of two schools of engineering (or colleges of engineering) anonymously named “A” and “B” to identify barriers faced by these institutions in implementing green construction;
Compare the main statements from the literature review to the findings from the case studies.
309 310 311
According to Yin (2005), the adoption of case studies 312 approach is appropriate when “how” and “why” research 313 questions are proposed; and when the study focuses on 314 contemporary events, as the green building adoption in 315 HEIs is. Thus, in relation to the framework for this study, 316 the multiple case study method adopted is limited to the Q5 317 study of two cases at Colleges/Schools of Engineering (A 318 and B), considering that this study seeks to find out “why” 319 green buildings are not adopted by these HEIs. 320 Interviews and data collection were conducted at 321 Schools of Engineering A and B. This occurred through 322 the analysis of sites and the conducting of interviews based 323 on scripts of questions. The main employees interviewed in 324 Schools of Engineering A and B were: 325 employees responsible for the construction of new buildings at these two HEIs; top management of these two HEIs; scholars/professors who work in the study of sustainability and development of new techniques and materials for civil construction in these HEIs.
326 327 328 329 330 331 332
From Table 1, it is possible to find more details on the respondents’ profile. The field research and data collection lasted five months. Section 4 presents the main research results. Based on the data collected, the conclusions are based on methodological triangulation (visits, interviews, and documents). Interviews have great importance in results analysis because the content guides the variables/aspects analyzed during direct visits and document analysis. Table 2 presents the interview script/questions. The script and questions were flexible in their use.
333
4. Research results
344
The results of this study were presented in three sections: current situation of green building at the Schools of Engineering A and B; the barriers to the adoption of more sustainable constructions at these Schools; and guidelines and suggestions for overcoming such barriers.
345
4.1. Current status of green building
350
School of Engineering A and School of Engineering B belong to the two universities from the Sa˜o Paulo State University System and they are considered world-class in several international rankings. Both HEIs respond to an entity, the Rectory, responsible for all units that comprise the respective universities; that is, they follow guidelines from the Rectory, and they also develop their own at the local level. The Rectory as well as the top management of these Schools of Engineering demonstrate interest in adopting
351
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343
346 347 348 349
352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
5
Table 1 Brief profile of research respondents/participants. Respondents/Interviewed
School A
School B
Employees
1 Engineer
The deputy-dean 1 Professor of environmental Issues
Top management Scholars/professor
2 Employees of the work group “sustainable buildings and green areas” 1 Engineer The head of the campus construction/civil engineering office The head of campus’ space/area planning 1 Professor of green buildings
Table 2 Sample of questions – interview scripts. Interview script How is green building being applied in this school? What does “green building” mean to you? Do you have specific objectives and targets regarding the adoption of green building practices? Do you consider the theme “green building” when discussing the school’s infrastructure? Does the school have a leading expert in green buildings issues? Do you have staff/employees working on this subject? Why or why not? What are the criteria for green building? Do you have any examples of green building projects at the school? What are the advantages of green buildings? What are the main challenges/barriers to the green building approach? What are the main organizational, technical, and financial barriers to green building?
361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392
the construction of green buildings on university campuses and there is already a mobilization for this to happen at both institutions. In other words, Top Management is committed to disseminate and develop the concept and practice of green constructions. The process of this type of construction is in its initial phase at both Schools, and there is no green building under construction at the campuses studied. However, what has been happening for some time is the adoption of some techniques, materials and sustainable technologies during the construction process for campus buildings. However, they are being employed in isolation and not systematically. It is also possible to observe the School of Engineering A’s effort to accelerate the adoption process through the creation of a Work Group called “Sustainable Buildings and Green Areas”, responsible for gathering studies about the theme and for developing guidelines aimed at increasing the environmental performance of buildings, among other objectives. There is also a program called the “Sustainable School of Engineering A”, which aims at organizing an institutional policy for inserting sustainability in a broad-based and integrated manner in teaching, research, extension and administration activities, encompassing the study body, faculty, employees and specialists through work groups. This initiative generates opportunity and facilitates the insertion of the green construction concept and technique. In relation to School of Engineering B, there are no clear actions aimed at accelerating the green construction process, but it is worth underscoring that the intention exists, by the Rectory as well as the entities responsible for new buildings, it is also present in the development of each
new project and in the revision of each project proposed up to then, considering that, at the Rectory’s request, starting in 2012, all submitted projects should take into account sustainability issues.
393
4.2. Barriers to the adoption of green buildings
397
Among the main barriers diagnosed in the process for adopting green buildings by Schools of Engineering A and B, some have already been mentioned by Richardson and Lynes (2007) for a Canadian university, and they are:
398 399
lack of financial incentive for reducing building maintenance costs; lack of indicators for evaluating how sustainable a building is; high startup capital investment; technical level and innovation among architects, designers and engineers, is less than desirable in terms of environmental issues; communication breakdown between members of the institution.
402
394 395 396
400 401
403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412
Besides those barriers mentioned and identified by Richardson and Lynes (2007), others were diagnosed at the Schools studied. They are:
413 414
lack of literature on green buildings and low volume of scientific research related to the theme; lack of a technical norm that establishes a standard construction procedure for green building in Brazilian HEIs;
416
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
415
417 418 419 420
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 6 421 422 423 424 425 426 427
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
in general, the sustainable techniques and materials are recent and there is no training available for the employees involved; lack of skilled and specialized jobs in green constructions; cultural barrier and resistance in face of the changes imposed by sustainability requirements at HEIs.
428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474
Each barrier will be examined and analyzed below in accordance with the reality of the Schools of Engineering studied herein. 4.2.1. Lack of financial incentive for reducing building maintenance costs There is a significant mobilization at both Schools for adopting green buildings. In that aspect, there are initiatives underway; however, there is no financial incentive program that, in a way, could drive this process. Although the program does not exist, the government and funding entities demonstrate their interest in the adoption process in other ways. Both the government and the funding entities seek to give preference to the financing of projects that encompass the sustainability concept. In a way, this attitude generates a response from the bodies responsible for constructing new buildings at the institutions, but it could be faster and more significant if there was a properly articulated action plan. 4.2.2. Lack of indicators for evaluating the sustainability of a building The fact that there is no standardized definition of what a sustainable building is hampers the creation of indicators to evaluate the building’s performance. Without any means to accompany and analyze how sustainable a building truly is, the following situation-problem arises: a green building can be constructed; however, how do you evaluate the environmental success of such a construction? When facing such a situation, the ease of not opting for constructing a green building is truly tempting, since whether inside or outside an institution, simply developing and applying an idea is not sufficient. It is also necessary to prove enforceability as well as profitability and level of success. 4.2.3. High startup capital investment The high startup investment for constructing a green building has been viewed, in a way, as a hindrance for installing sustainable constructions; however, if compared to the diagnosis made by Richardson and Lynes (2007), in the scenario of the institutions participating in this research (Schools A and B), this barrier is much less relevant than reported at the University of Waterloo (Richardson and Lynes, 2007). This is because the top management of entities responsible for designing and managing new construction projects on the campuses, linked directly to the university Rectories, do not analyze only the design and its initial cost, but also costs on building maintenance throughout its useful life, among other crite-
ria analyzed. This entire analysis provides an overview of long-term cost management, thus providing a more detailed evaluation than just the startup capital invested at the moment of opting for the type of construction, as well as the return on investment.
475
4.2.4. Employee empowerment Although the techniques and materials considered sustainable are recent, have great repercussion and are intensely disseminated by popular media, the technical content surrounding them is scarce, especially in relation to Brazilian literature. Besides the search for innovation, it is necessary to focus on scientific research, technical research, technical detail and standardization of the green building construction process. Environmental training should be provided to empower employees, as indicated by some of those interviewed at the Schools of Engineering A and B.
480
4.2.5. Communication breakdown between members of the institution A good communication system is one that circulates information efficiently so that all those involved in the process have access and understand the information. Unfortunately, the referred to system has not worked as well as expected, since at both institutions isolated initiatives were observed to exist aimed at sustainability and at more environmentally sustainable constructions; however, there is no connection between them nor any knowledge disseminated about their benefits. In the case of School of Engineering A, a Work Group (WG) was created called “Sustainable Buildings and Green Areas”, which at the moment aims at organizing studies about the subject, elaborating a proposal of guidelines for improving the environmental performance of buildings and developing studies for incorporating these guidelines at the institution, improving communication. In relation to the School of Engineering B, communication could also be improved, especially the communication about advanced green construction practices.
491
4.2.6. Lack of literature on green buildings and low volume of scientific research related to the theme The scarcity of material on green buildings and the low volume of research on the theme are seen as a major hindrance to the installation process for green building practices in Schools A and B, considering that a less than desirable theoretical and technical framework makes the development of at least a minimally acceptable project improbable.
512
4.2.7. Lack of a technical norm that establishes a standard construction procedure for a green building in Brazilian HEIs The Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standardize several types of processes. The standardization of a process permits checking quality
521
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
476 477 478 479
481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490
492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511
513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520
522 523 524 525 526 527
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562
and, in several situations, it serves as an instrument of defense for the consumer. Thus, the lack of a technical standard that makes the green building construction process standard is one of the main difficulties encountered since there are means to evaluate whether the construction is being executed appropriately; whether the procedures used are correct; whether the materials are indicated for the situation, among other points that need attention. 4.2.8. In general, sustainable techniques and materials are recent and there is no training available for them Although the techniques and materials considered sustainable exist, the number of persons able to provide green training on them is quite reduced. In face of this situation, the HEIs see themselves at an impasse, because even if their designers develop projects or if third party projects demonstrate interest in using sustainable techniques and materials, there is no way to execute them without proper training. 4.2.9. Lack of skilled and specialized jobs The fact of using sustainable techniques and materials goes much beyond the mere execution of the project. Throughout its useful life, the building should undergo maintenance and in some situations it will need repairs. Qualified and specialized labor will be needed and, unfortunately, the number of workers with these characteristics is much reduced. The fact that Schools of Engineering A and B are public requires specialized services to be contracted generally after the tender, hampering the process. This often drives institutions to opt for not using environmentally more sustainable techniques or materials since the flow of people in a construction inside a university campus is high and often cannot be interrupted or it will cause problems, and thus need quick repairs and specialized maintenance to cause minimal interference in the institution’s routine.
571 572
4.2.10. Cultural barrier and resistance to change It is not important to install a system that does not work or that works with reduced potential. Institutions thus demonstrate a certain resistance to adopting green buildings since, after construction of the building, it needs maintenance throughout its useful life, so of which are so basic, they should be performed by the users; however, many prove to be resistant to change. This resistance also stems from cultural barriers to green issues experienced at every level of society, even in teaching and research institutes.
573
5. Discussions
574
Schools of Engineering A and B, according to those interviewed, have strong intentions to adopt environmentally more sustainable buildings, but, on the other hand, they need to deal with the difficulties that arise during this process. Possible solutions and guidelines are proposed in this section to deal with such barriers, based on consulted
563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570
575 576 577 578 579
7
literature and on the information collected during the case studies. Among the barriers identified in the Schools of Engineering A and B, some have already been cited by Richardson and Lynes (2007) in a similar case study conducted at the University of Waterloo (Canada), such as: the lack of financial incentives to reduce building maintenance costs; the lack of indicators to evaluate a building’s sustainability; high startup capital investment; green technical level and innovation among architects, designers and engineers is less than desirable, and communication breakdowns among institution members. The study proposed guidelines and solutions for some barriers, such as facilitating collaboration and internal communication, stimulating partnership among individuals involved in the installation process and the establishment of quantitative sustainability goals. These solutions are applicable in the current scenario of Schools of Engineering A and B; however, they are not sufficient for overcoming all identified barriers. Other solutions could also be adopted, such as the study and development of indexes for evaluating the success of a green building and investment in research related to the discovery and improvement of new sustainable materials and technologies, which could imply lower costs in materials, thus reducing the initial investment. The two Schools of Engineering analyzed need to establish their intention to adopt green constructions. The presence of a group responsible for working with the sustainable building theme would help accelerate the process and focus technical studies on them, making it possible to more easily identify challenges and opportunities. The barriers that differ from those identified in the literature consulted include: scarce literature about green buildings and low volume of scientific research related to the theme; lack of a Brazilian technical standard that establishes a standard procedure for constructing a green building; the fact that, in general, sustainable techniques and materials are recent and there is no training available about them, and; the lack of skilled and specialized labor and the cultural barrier that generates resistance to change. The suggestions for overcoming these problems are: incentives for research about themes like sustainable buildings; development and improvement of sustainable materials and technologies; joint mobilization of scholars and official associations, seeking to develop a technical standard on green constructions, and; the development of an awareness campaign about the theme. Besides these solutions proposed, there are others; they are broad-based and go beyond the limits of Schools of Engineering A and B, needing the involvement of other players from society. In this context, the following is suggested: create and increase investments in green training courses related to green constructions, which would increase the capacity of skilled labor and would indirectly increase the number of persons qualified to give environmental training.
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 8
N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
637
6. Final remarks
638
As exposed initially, this study aimed at diagnosing the barriers to the adoption of environmentally more sustainable constructions at two Schools of Engineering located in the state of Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil, analyzing them and developing guidelines and possible solutions for overcoming them. A summary of the main results of this study are shown below.
639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681
Regarding green buildings in these Schools of Engineering, the process is still in its initial phase, but the intention exists and they have been mobilizing actions to accelerate this process. In the case of School of Engineering A, these actions moved on to more concrete attitudes, such as the creation of a Work Group responsible for the theme of sustainable buildings at the institution. In the case of School of Engineering B, this intention has mobilized the Rectory and the entities responsible for the campus construction process, but there is no sector, or group, responsible for this theme at the institution. In relation to the barriers identified, the main ones are the lack of literature on the theme; the lack of a technical standard for the construction process of a green building; the lack of training available for new sustainable techniques and technologies, and; the lack of skilled and specialized labor. Among the main barriers, the lack of a technical standard, the shortage of skilled and specialized jobs and the lack of training on the new sustainable techniques and technologies are the most difficult to overcome since it involves other players and organizations of society, going beyond the reach of Schools of Engineering A and B. Schools of Engineering are suggested to invest in: increasing the incentive for research on sustainable constructions, the incentive for mobilizing faculty for training in the theme; mobilizing professionals in civil construction for developing a technical standard that encompasses the construction process for sustainable buildings and investment in research related to the discovery and improvement of new sustainable materials and technology, since this will disseminate and popularize the materials, which can imply a possible cut in prices over the long term, and the creation of a clear, long-term measurement system for use in greener constructions.
682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690
It is hoped that this study can contribute to enriching the theme of study about barriers to the adoption of more green buildings at HEIs, most especially by the Schools of Engineering, and that it can serve as a guide for institutions that decide to adopt this type of construction, so they can handle the difficulties faced during the process with greater ease, casting a light on the barriers and proposing solutions and guidelines for overcoming them.
This study also presents relevant discoveries on the subject, such as the fact that the financial barrier, pointed out by Richardson and Lynes (2007) as one of the main ones, is not as relevant in the cases of the Schools of Engineering A and B. Even though institutions that participated in the case studies are public, that is, probably having limited financial resources, it has become clear in the interviews that the expense on green constructions is viewed positively and deserves to be made due to the long-term benefits they generate for society. Another important discovery in this study is the identification of technical barriers, relative scarcity of literature and shortage of skilled and qualified/trained labor, besides the concern about the future maintenance of green constructions as the main barriers at Schools of Engineering A and B, distancing themselves, in a way, from the main barriers identified in the literature. The biggest limitation in this study is related to its qualitative nature, to the collection of data and subjective analyses, which are typical of case studies. Besides that, the main information of the study was obtained through interviews, and respondent bias could exist. Another important limitation is that just two Schools of Engineering in the state of Sa˜o Paulo, Brazil, were considered in the study, avoiding any sort of generalization of results obtained.
691
Acknowledgement
715
This research was supported by FAPESP – The Sao Paulo State Research Foundation (Grant # 12/07263-4).
716
References
718
692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714
717
719 Alshuwaikhat, H.M., Abubakar, I., 2008. An integrated approach to 720 achieving campus sustainability: assessment of the current campus 721 environmental management practices. J. Cleaner Prod. 16, 1777–1785. 722 Bayraktar, M.E., Arif, F., 2013. Venture capital opportunities in green 723 building technologies: a strategic analysis for emerging entrepreneurial 724 companies in South Florida and Latin America. J. Manage. Eng. 29, 725 79–85. 726 U Berardi, Clarifying the new interpretations of the concept of sustainable Q6 727 building. Sustainable Cities and Society, In Press, 2013.. 728 Bond, S., 2011. Barriers and drivers to green buildings in Australia and 729 New Zealand. J. Property Invest. Finance 29 (4/5), 494–509. 730 Brinkhurst, M., Rose, P., Maurice, G., Ackerman, J.D., 2011. Achieving 731 campus sustainability: top-down, bottom-up, or neither? Int. J. 732 Sustainability Higher Educ. 12 (4), 338–354. 733 Chau, C.K., Tse, M.S., Chung, K.Y., 2010. A choice experiment to 734 estimate the effect of green experience on preferences and willingness735 to-pay for green building attributes. Build. Environ. 45, 2553–2561. 736 Finlay, J., Massey, J., 2012. Eco-campus: applying the ecocity model to 737 develop green university and college campuses. Int. J. Sustainability 738 Higher Educ. 13, 150–165. 739 Green Building Council Brazil, Brasil ja´ tem as primeiras construcßo˜es 740 sustenta´veis de 2012. Accessed: February 21, 2012, Available: 741 www.gbcbrasil.org.br/?p=imprensa-detalhes&I=293, 2012. 742 Hillary, R., 2004. Environmental management systems and the smaller 743 enterprise. J. Cleaner Prod. 12, 561–569. 744 Hoffman, A.J., Henn, R., 2008. Overcoming the social and psychological 745 barriers to green building. Org. Environ. 21, 390–419. 746 Ikediashi, D.I., Ogunlana, S.O., Oladokun, M.G., Adewuyi, T., 2012. 747 Assessing the level of commitment and barriers to sustainable facilities
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
IJSBE 47
No. of Pages 9
3 June 2014 N. Kasai, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 748 management practice: a case of Nigeria. Int. J. Sustainable Built. 749 Environ. 1 (2), 167–176. 750 Instituto para o Desenvolvimento da Habitacßa˜o Ecolo´gica, Nove Passos 751 para a Obra Sustenta´vel, Accessed February 14 2012, Available: http:// 752 www.idhea.com.br/pdf/nove_passos.pdf, 2012. 753 Lee, W.L., Burnett, J., 2008. Benchmarking energy use assessment of HK754 BEAM, BREEAM and LEED. Build. Environ. 43, 1882–1891. 755 Li, X., Strezov, V., Amati, M., 2013. A qualitative study of motivation 756 and influences for academic green building developments in Australian 757 universities. J. Green Build. 8 (3), 166–183. 758 Marker, A.W., Mason, S.G., Morrow, P. Change factors influencing the 759 diffusion and adoption of green building practices. Performance 760 Q7 Improvement Quaterly, 26, 4, 5–24. 761 Paumgartten, P., 2003. The business case for high performance green 762 buildings: sustainability and its financial impact. J. Facil. Manage. 2, 763 26–34. 764 Revista Exame, Construcßa˜o civil deve crescer de 3,5% a 4% em 2013, 765 Accessed: March 14, 2013, Available: http://exame.abril.com.br/ 766 economia/noticias/construcao-civil-no-brasil-deve-crescer-de-3-5-a-4767 em-2013, 2013. 768 Richardson, G.A., Lynes, J.K., 2007. Institutional motivations and 769 barriers to the construction of green buildings on campus: a case 770 study of the University of Waterloo, Ontario. Int. J. Sustainability 771 Higher Educ. 8, 339–354. 772 Samari, M., Ghodrati, N., Esmaeilifar, R., Olfat, P., Wira, M., Shafiei, 773 M., 2013. The investigation of the barriers in developing green building 774 in Malaysia. Mod. Appl. Sci. 7 (2).
9
Scheuer, C., Keoleian, G.A., Reppe, P., 2003. Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy Build. 35, 1049–1064. U. S. Green Building Council, How to achieve certification, Accessed: February 21 2012, Available: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage. aspx?CMSPageID=1991, 2012. Wang, Y., Shi, H., Sun, M., Huisingh, D., Hansson, L., Wang, R., 2013. Moving towards an ecologically sound society? Starting from green universities and environmental higher education. J. Cleaner Prod. 61, 1–5. Wilkinson, A., Hill, M., Gollan, P., 2001. The sustainability debate. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 21, 1492–1502. Yin, R.K., 2005. Estudo de caso: Planejamento e Me´todos. Bookman, Porto Alegre. Yuan, F., Shen, L., Li, Q., 2011. Emergy analysis of the recycling options for construction and demolition waste. Waste Manag. 31, 2503–2511. Yuan, X., Zuo, J., Huisingh, D., 2013. Green universities in China – What matters? J. Cleaner Prod. 61, 36–45. Zhang, N., Williams, I.D., Kemp, S., Smith, N.F., 2011. Greening academia: developing sustainable waste management at Higher Education Institutions. Waste Manage. (Oxford) 31 (7), 1606–1616. Zhou, X., Yan, J., Zhu, J., Cai, P., 2013. Survey of energy consumption and energy conservation measures for colleges and universities in Guangdong province. Energy Build. 66, 112–118. Zuo, J., Zhao, Z.Y., 2014. Green building research-current status and future agenda: a review. Renew. Sustainable Energy Rev. 30, 271–281.
Q1 Please cite this article in press as: Kasai, N., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. Barriers to green buildings at two Brazilian Engineering Schools. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.004
775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801